Weiss, Richard D. vs. UnumProvident

Year: 2004
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
Case Number: 05-5428

UP argued that the Supreme Court has held that RICO enforcement does not conflict with ERISA or the McCarran-Ferguson Act and that UnumProvident’s history of reprehensible bad faith claim handling, evidenced by governmental sanctions and numerous court decisions, requires that Plaintiffs be allowed their day in court.

UP’s brief was written pro bono by David M. Hoffman, Esq., of the Law Office of David M. Hoffman, Denise Y. Tataryn, Esq. of Mansfield, Tanick & Cohen, PA, Amy Bach, Esq. and Eugene R. Anderson, Esq. of Anderson, Kill & Olick, PC.

 

The information presented in this publication is for general informational purposes and is not a substitute for legal advice. If you have a specific legal issue or problem, United Policyholders recommends that you consult with an attorney. Guidance on hiring professional help can be found in the “Find Help” section of www.uphelp.org. United Policyholders does not sell insurance or certify, endorse or warrant any of the insurance products, vendors, or professionals identified on our website.

Source: https://uphelp.org/amicus-briefs/weiss-richard-d-vs-unumprovident/
Date: May 11, 2024