Wright v. Louisiana Corrugated Products L L C, et al
Carl Dewayne Wright |
Louisiana Corrugated Products L L C, U S Corrugated Inc and Vantage Health Plan Inc |
3:2014cv00744 |
April 4, 2014 |
US District Court for the Western District of Louisiana |
Monroe Office |
Ouachita |
Karen L Hayes |
Robert G James |
Other Labor Litigation |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 64 JUDGMENT: The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge having been considered, no objections thereto having been filed, and finding that same is supported by the law and the record in this matter, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Motion for Declaratory Judgment, construed as a motion for partial summary judgment [Doc. No. 52], filed by Plaintiff Carl DeWayne Wright is hereby GRANTED. In the event that any issues of plan term interpretation arise in the course of his cl aim for wrongful denial of benefits, the Court shall review the issue(s) de novo. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Joint Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 54] filed by Defendants Vantage Health Plan, Inc., Louisiana Corrugated Products, LLC, and U.S. Corrugated, Inc., is hereby DENIED. Signed by Judge Robert G James on 4/13/15. (crt,DickersonSld, D) |
Filing 43 JUDGMENT adopting report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge having been considered, no objections thereto having been filed, and finding that same is supported by the law and the record in this matter, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendants Joint Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 31] is hereby GRANTED, and judgment is entered in favor of Defendants declaring 1) that Plaintiffs state law claim for unpaid benefits under the Plan is completely preempted by ERISA and, thus, recast as a claim under ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B), and 2) that Plaintiffs state law claims for penalties and detrimental reliance under Louisiana Revised Statute § 22:1821 and L ouisiana Civil Code Article 1967, respectively, are conflict-preempted by ERISA. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs state law claims for penalties and detrimental reliance under Louisiana Revised Statute § 22:1821 and Louisiana Civil Code Article 1967, respectively, are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, as preempted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Vantage Health Plan, Inc.s Motion to Dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Rem edies and in the Alternative, for Summary Judgment [Doc. No. 11], and Defendants Louisiana Corrugated Products, LLC, and U.S. Corrugated, Inc.s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (converted to a motion for summary judgment) [Doc. No. 17] are ea ch GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiffs recast claim for unpaid benefits under ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B) are hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Defendants motions [Doc. Nos. 11 & 17] otherwise are DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is hereby STA YED for a period of 60 days, so Plaintiff may exhaust administrative remedies, and, thereafter, amend his Complaint to assert his then exhausted § 502(a)(1)(B) claim. If Plaintiff instead desires to forego his § 502(a)(1)(B) claim and proceed solely with his COBRA claim, he shall file a notice in the record no later than November 21, 2014. ( Compliance Deadline set for 11/21/2014.). Signed by Judge Robert G James on 11/7/14. (crt,DickersonSld, D) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Louisiana Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.