Doe v. UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Doe v. UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America

Doe v. UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America

Plaintiff:	John Doe
Defendant:	UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America
Case Number:	1:2012cv09327
Filed:	December 20, 2012
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	XX Out of State
Presiding Judge:	Lewis A. Kaplan
Nature of Suit:	Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action:	29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
February 23, 2016	Filing 108 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 105 Report and Recommendations; granting 94 Motion for Attorney Fees. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees, costs and prejudgment interest [DI 94] is granted to the extent that plaintiff is grant ed attorneys' fees in the amount of $219,385.34 in attorneys' fees, $946.12 in costs and $92,062.56 in prejudgment interest for an aggregate award of $312,394.02. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. The Court has considered plaintiff's other arguments de novo and has concluded that they are unpersuasive. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 2/23/2016) (adc)
July 9, 2015	Filing 88 MEMORANDUM OPINION: The foregoing constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. This Court concludes that plaintiff has met his burden to show that he is disabled under the Plan. Settle judgment on notice. (As is further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 7/9/2015) (spo)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 23, 2016

Filing 108 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 105 Report and Recommendations; granting 94 Motion for Attorney Fees. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees, costs and prejudgment interest [DI 94] is granted to the extent that plaintiff is grant ed attorneys' fees in the amount of $219,385.34 in attorneys' fees, $946.12 in costs and $92,062.56 in prejudgment interest for an aggregate award of $312,394.02. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. The Court has considered plaintiff's other arguments de novo and has concluded that they are unpersuasive. (As further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 2/23/2016) (adc)

July 9, 2015

Filing 88 MEMORANDUM OPINION: The foregoing constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. This Court concludes that plaintiff has met his burden to show that he is disabled under the Plan. Settle judgment on notice. (As is further set forth in this Order.) (Signed by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on 7/9/2015) (spo)

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 New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Doe v. UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: John Doe
Represented By:	Scott Madison Riemer
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 ]
Defendant: UNUM Life Insurance Company Of America
Represented By:	Patrick Walter Begos
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.

Why Is My Information Online?