LEIMKUEHLER v. AMERICAN UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
ROBERT V LEIMKUEHLER |
AMERICAN UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY |
1:2010cv00333 |
March 22, 2010 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Indianapolis Office |
Jane Magnus-Stinson |
Larry J. McKinney |
Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A. |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 210 ORDER - AUL's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs, dkt. 183 , is DENIED. In light of that denial, the AARP's Motion for Leave to File Brief Amicus Curiae in Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Attorney's Fees, dkt. 190 , and the Trustee's Motion to Stay, dkt. 206 , are DENIED AS MOOT. (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 5/31/2012. (JKS) |
Filing 166 ORDER denying as moot 91 Plaintiff's Motion to Certify Class - Court now DENIES AS MOOT given the Court's entry of summary judgment in favor of the Defendant. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 1/5/2012. (JKS) |
Filing 75 ORDER re: Plaintiff / Counter-defendant Robert Leimkuehler's motion to dismiss Defendant / Counter-plaintiff American United Life Insurance Company's Counterclaims. [Dkt. 68.] For the reasons detailed herein, the Court GRANTS IN PART and D ENIES IN PART the Trustee's motion. (See Order.) The motion is DENIED with respect to Counts I and II, except to the extent that those counts rely upon 29 U.S.C. § 1105(a). The motion is GRANTED with respect to Counts III and IV. The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Count V. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/25/2011. (LBK) |
Filing 63 ENTRY granting in part and denying in part 47 Defendant American United Life Insurance Company's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings against all of the claims of Plaintiff Trustee Robert V. Leimkuehler (the "Trustee") under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c). For the reasons set forth herein, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is DENIED as to Count I in its entirety and Count II, to the extent that it claims that AUL, as a fiduciary, violated 29 U.S.C. 1106(b)(3). The motion is GRANTED as to Count II, to the extent that it claims that AUL, as a fiduciary, violated 29 U.S.C. 1106(b)(1) and as to Count IV in its entirety. Count III is a prayer for injunctive relief and asserts no substantive claims, and will su rvive only in conjunction with the substantive claims that remain. No partial judgment shall issue as to the claims resolved in this Entry; final judgment will issue at the conclusion of all the proceedings. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 10/22/2010. (LBK) |
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 Indiana Southern 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
Search for this case: LEIMKUEHLER v. AMERICAN UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: AMERICAN UNITED LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY | |
Represented By: | Deborah A. Coleman |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: ROBERT V LEIMKUEHLER | |
Represented By: | Klint L. Bruno |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.