Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Pearson
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
FEIKENS, District Judge.
This is an interpleader action filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife). MetLife is the claim administrator for the General Motors Corporation Life and Disability Plan. On June 15,1992 a plan participant, Samuel L. Pearson, Jr., (Samuel) died. MetLife received, two claims for his life insurance .proceeds, one from Sylvia Pearson (Sylvia), Samuel’s ex-wife, and one from Charlene Pearson (Charlene), Samuel’s wife at the time of his death.
Under the terms of the plan, Samuel was entitled to designate a beneficiary for his life insurance…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- McCarty v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1981
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- 20 Employee Benefits Cas. 1097, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23919g Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Mary M. Pressley, Personal Representative for the Estate of Alvin J. Pressley, Deceased, Barbara J. PressleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. BarlowDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1995
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. PressleyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- 22 Employee Benefits Cas. 1765, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6468, 98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6892, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9544, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23947e Gary Emard v. Hughes Aircraft Company, a Corporation Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a Corporation Alex StencelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Emard v. Hughes Aircraft Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998