Patrick, Patricia v. UNUM
Year 2000
Court California Supreme Court
Case Number S098602
Issue
  • ERISA
State
  • California

The scope of ERISA preemption should not be extended beyond congress’ intent and should not be allowed to preempt first party insurer bad faith tort claims.

Related Docs
Author UP's letter brief was written pro bono by Amy Bach, Esq.
Related Cases
Michael Cloud v. The Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan
Year: 2024
Court: United States Supreme Court
Case Number: 24-61
Issue:
  • ERISA
State:
  • Texas

In its amicus brief, United Policyholders argues that the Supreme Court should grant certiorari to make clear that in the context of ERISA claims, federal courts are not required to give deference to fiduciaries who have denied benefit claims without engaging in a full and fair claims process.…
Barber, James vs. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Year: 2003
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
Case Number: 03-4363
Issue:
  • ERISA
State:
  • Pennsylvania

ERISA should not preempt state insurance laws.
Denmark vs. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston
Year: 2005
Court: Massachusetts District Court
Case Number: 05-2877
Issue:
  • ERISA
  • Objective evidence of disability
State:
  • Massachusetts

Anti-consumer and anti-policyholder affects of denying coverage in disability cases involving both a disease that is difficult to document objectively and an overwhelming amount of medical evidence that favors a finding of complete disability. Long term care insurance companies are sometimes permitted too much discretion…
Gilbert, Bill vs. Alta Health & Life Insurance and Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance
Year: 2001
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit
Case Number: 01-10829-GG
Issue:
  • ERISA
State:
  • Alabama

Scope of ERISA preemption after Unum Life Insurance v. Ward. United Policyholders argued that remedial state statutes regulate insurance and should not be pre-empted by ERISA.