Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Group Insurance Plan Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Group Insurance Plan

Murphy v. Deloitte & Touche Group Insurance Plan

619 F.3D 1151, 49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS CAS. 2345, 77 FED.R.SERV.3D 590, 2010.C10.0001047

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Descrizione dell’editore

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.

GENERE
Professionali e tecnici
PUBBLICATO
2010
8 settembre
LINGUA
EN
Inglese
PAGINE
27
EDITORE
LawApp Publishers
DIMENSIONE
84,2
KB

Altri libri di Arizona Supreme Court

Malanga V. Royal Indemnity Co. Malanga V. Royal Indemnity Co.
1967
Swanson v. Image Bank Swanson v. Image Bank
2003
Allstate Insurance Co. v. O''toole Allstate Insurance Co. v. O''toole
1995
Aesthetic Property Maintenance Inc. v. Capital Indemnity Corp. Aesthetic Property Maintenance Inc. v. Capital Indemnity Corp.
1995
Sohl v. Winkler Sohl v. Winkler
1994
Matter of Evans Matter of Evans
1995