No. 18-1305
Timothy O'Neill v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Response Waived
Tags: civil-procedure erroneous-interpretation hoover-precedent job-description judicial-review long-term-disability plan-administrator sixth-circuit social-security-disability stare-decisis stare-decisis,civil-procedure,due-process,appeals,
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity
SocialSecurity
Latest Conference:
2019-05-23
Question Presented (from Petition)
Did the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the SIXTH CIRCUIT wrongfully and grievously apply the doctrine of STARE DECISIS in upholding the decision of Magistrate Judge Ellen Carmody in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN (1:16-cv-01061).
Did the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the SIXTH CIRCUIT wrongfully apply Hoover v. Provident 290 F.3d when deciding the plan administrator correctly interpreted the plan in denying O'Neill LTD benefits.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Sixth Circuit wrongfully apply the doctrine of stare decisis in upholding the district court's decision denying long-term disability benefits?
Docket Entries
2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-04-25
Waiver of right of respondent Unum Life Insurance Company of America to respond filed.
2019-04-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 16, 2019)
Attorneys
Timothy O'Neill
Timothy O'Neill — Petitioner
Unum Life Insurance Company of America
D. Andrew Portinga — Miller Johnson, Respondent