Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Dow Corning Trust v. Claimants' Advisory Committee

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided December 17, 2010No. 09-1827, 09-1830Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAlice M. Batchelder, Chief Judge

I concur with the majority opinion’s conclusion that the Plan definition of “total disability” requires a showing of disability in both vocational and self-care activities. In my opinion, that conclusion is required by the rules of English grammar, as recognized by the majority opinion, and by simple common sense. I write separately because I believe the majority opinion’s discussion confuses, rather than clarifies, the standard of review in cases such as these. I must also dissent from the majority opinion’s holding that the Plan definition of “Breast Implants” is ambiguous and its…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Evans v. Famous Music Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2004
  2. In Re Terex Corporation, Debtor. Terex Corporation v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
  3. Bridgeport Music, Inc. Westbound Records, Inc., Southfield Music, Inc. Nine Records, Inc. v. Dimension Films Miramax Film Corp., No Limit Films Llc, Bridgeport Music, Inc. Southfield Music, Inc. Nine Records, Inc., Westbound Records, Inc. v. Dimension Films, No Limit Films LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2005
  4. Madison Avenue Leasehold, LLC v. Madison Bentley Associates LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  5. In Re Dow Corning Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API