Klungvedt v. Unum Group et al

Plaintiff: David N Klungvedt
Defendant: Unum Group and Paul Revere Life Insurance Company
Case Number: 2:2012cv00651
Filed: March 27, 2012
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: John W Sedwick
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1441
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
February 13, 2013 118 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 59 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 2/13/13.(JWS)
November 1, 2012 62 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER AND OPINION, Defendants' motion to amend its answer 36 is granted, and the proposed amended answer at docket 36-1, which admits that ERISA is inapplicable, may be filed; Plaintiff's motion 40 is granted in part and denied in part; his request for summary judgment in his favor on the issue of ERISA's inapplicability is granted, but his request for sanctions against defendants' counsel is denied. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 10/31/12.(REW)
October 31, 2012 61 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting in part and denying in part 33 Motion in Limine; denying 33 Motion to Disqualify Counsel. Signed by Judge John W Sedwick on 10/31/12.(JWS)
June 21, 2012 20 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re 7 Motion to Expedite; 11 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; 12 Motion to Strike. Plaintiff's motion at docket 7 for a speedy hearing on his claim for declaratory relief is GRANTED as follows: 1) The parties shall have 60 days from the date of this order to engage in factual discovery on the issue of whether ERISA applies to the insurance plan in question. 2) At the close of the 60-day period of limited discovery, either party may file a properly supported motion f or summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 on the question of whether ERISA applies and therefore preempts plaintiff's state law claims. Defendants' motion at docket 11 for judgment on the pleadings, construed in part as a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, is DENIED. Defendants' motion to strike at docket 12 is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge John W. Sedwick on 6/21/12. (JWS)

Access additional case information on PACER

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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Klungvedt v. Unum Group et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David N Klungvedt
Represented By: Patrick Thomas Stanley
Represented By: Edward O Comitz
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Unum Group
Represented By: Stephen M Bressler
Represented By: Jason M Porter
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Paul Revere Life Insurance Company
Represented By: Stephen M Bressler
Represented By: Jason M Porter
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?