Legal Opinion

Dragu v. Motion Picture Industry Health Plan for Active Participants

District Court, N.D. California

Decided February 5, 2016No. Case No. 14-cv-04268-RSPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES AND COSTS

RICHARD SEEBORG, United States District Judge

I. INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Elise Dragu’s attorney, James Keenley, helped his client significantly. He pressed Dragu’s claims and achieved enviable success. As a result of Keeney’s efforts, Dragu obtained all the relief she requested — a finding that defendant Motion Picture Industry Health Plan for Active Participants (“the Plan”) had abused its discretion. Keenley and members of his firm have devoted 215.91 hours to this *1125case. Keenley now seeks compensation for his efforts in the amount…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Moreno v. City of SacramentoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
  3. Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
  4. Welch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  5. Nadarajah v. HolderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Board of Trustees of the San Diego Electrical Pension Trust v. My Electrician Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2021
  2. Downes v. Unum Life Insurance Company of AmericaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2024
  3. Herrman v. LifeMap Assurance CompanyDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API