Legal Opinion
Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Group Insurance Plan
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided September 8, 2010No. 09-2028PublishedCited by 132 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EBEL, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff-Appellant Aileen Murphy was a participant in the Deloitte & Touche Group Insurance Plan (“the Plan”), an insurance plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) both insured and administered the Plan; thus, it operated under an inherent dual role conflict of interest, see Weber v. GE Group Life Assurance Co., 541 F.3d 1002, 1011 (10th Cir.2008). While a participant in the Plan, Ms. Murphy filed a claim for long-term disability benefits, which MetLife ultimately denied.
Ms. Murphy then sought…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Crawford-El v. BrittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Max W. Perry v. Simplicity Engineering, a Division of Lukens General Industries, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Dan M.. Sandoval v. Aetna Life And Casualty Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
- Jim L. Woolsey v. Marion Laboratories, Inc. Marion Laboratories, Inc., Profit Sharing PlanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by132 opinions
- Helton v. AT & T Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Crosby v. Louisiana Health Service and Indem. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
- EUGENE S. v. Horizon Blue Cross Blue ShieldCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
- Carr v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2015
- Cardoza v. United of Omaha Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2013
127 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.