Riehl v. The Hartford

Defendant: The Hartford
Plaintiff: Mary Ellen Riehl
Case Number: 3:2013cv00186
Filed: January 29, 2013
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Louisville Office
County: Jefferson
Referring Judge: James D. Moyer
Presiding Judge: Charles R. Simpson
Nature of Suit: Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
June 11, 2014 19 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 6/10/2014; re 15 MOTION to Reverse the Decision of the Plan Administrator or in the Alternative MOTION to Remand Administrative Record to the Plan Administrator and 18 MOTION to Dismiss; A separate order will be entered in accordance with this opinion.cc:counsel (TLB)

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 Kentucky Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Riehl v. The Hartford
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: The Hartford
Represented By: Robert L. Steinmetz
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 ]
Plaintiff: Mary Ellen Riehl
Represented By: Robert A. Florio
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.