Legal Opinion
Echague v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
District Court, N.D. California
Decided May 19, 2014No. Case No. 12-cv-00640-WHOPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Re: Dkt. Nos. 92, 103, 104, 107
ORDER GRANTING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AS A MATTER OF LAW; DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND
WILLIAM H. ORRICK, United States District. Judge
After being diagnosed with cancer and going on medical leave, Carol Echague sent defendant TriNet Group, Inc. a specific inquiry about her insurance coverage, stating that she did not want any of it to lapse. TriNet responded by referring her to confusing form letters it had already provided that did…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- United States v. HinksonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- CIGNA Corp. v. AmaraSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Silva v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2014
- Bush v. Liberty Life Assurance Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Zisk v. Gannett Co. Income Protection PlanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
- Burton v. Colorado AccessColorado Court of Appeals · 2015
- Del Prete v. Magellan Behavioral Health, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.