Sigal v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Southern District Sigal v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Sigal v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Plaintiff:	Alexander Sigal
Defendant:	Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Case Number:	1:2016cv03397
Filed:	May 6, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	Kings
Presiding Judge:	J. Paul Oetken
Nature of Suit:	Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1132
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
March 5, 2018	Filing 86 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 60 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment by Plaintiff filed by Alexander Sigal, 51 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. For the foregoing reasons, MetLife's motion for summary judgmen t is GRANTED in part and Sigal's cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The only issue remaining in the case is whether Sigal met his burden of proof at the administrative appeal stage of his continuing claim for benefits beyond June 20, 2 013. The parties shall file a joint status letter by March 19, 2018, indicating how they propose to proceed with this case, including whether they consent to a "bench trial on the papers" in which the Court would resolve all factual disputes. See, e.g., Barbu, 35 F. Supp. 3d at 279. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 51 and 60. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 3/05/2018) (ama)
May 12, 2017	Filing 42 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 41 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Commence Summary Judgment Briefing addressed to Judge J. Paul Oetken from Jennifer L. Hess dated May 11, 2017 filed by Alexander Sigal, [34 ] MOTION for Protective Order filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. For the foregoing reasons, MetLife's motion for a protective order is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall not publicly disseminate the portions of the CMG produced by M etLife in this action and shall use those portions only in this action. The parties are directed to submit a stipulated protective order by May 19, 2017. The parties should also meet and confer in order to propose to the Court whether the fact discovery deadline and/or the summary judgment briefing schedule require extension by May 19, 2017. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 34 and 41. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 5/12/2017) (ama)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 5, 2018

Filing 86 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 60 CROSS MOTION for Summary Judgment by Plaintiff filed by Alexander Sigal, 51 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. For the foregoing reasons, MetLife's motion for summary judgmen t is GRANTED in part and Sigal's cross-motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The only issue remaining in the case is whether Sigal met his burden of proof at the administrative appeal stage of his continuing claim for benefits beyond June 20, 2 013. The parties shall file a joint status letter by March 19, 2018, indicating how they propose to proceed with this case, including whether they consent to a "bench trial on the papers" in which the Court would resolve all factual disputes. See, e.g., Barbu, 35 F. Supp. 3d at 279. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 51 and 60. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 3/05/2018) (ama)

May 12, 2017

Filing 42 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 41 FIRST LETTER MOTION for Extension of Time to Complete Discovery and Commence Summary Judgment Briefing addressed to Judge J. Paul Oetken from Jennifer L. Hess dated May 11, 2017 filed by Alexander Sigal, [34 ] MOTION for Protective Order filed by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. For the foregoing reasons, MetLife's motion for a protective order is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall not publicly disseminate the portions of the CMG produced by M etLife in this action and shall use those portions only in this action. The parties are directed to submit a stipulated protective order by May 19, 2017. The parties should also meet and confer in order to propose to the Court whether the fact discovery deadline and/or the summary judgment briefing schedule require extension by May 19, 2017. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the motions at Docket Numbers 34 and 41. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 5/12/2017) (ama)

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: Sigal v. Metropolitan 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: Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Represented By:	Michael H Bernstein
Represented By:	Matthew Paul Mazzola
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: Alexander Sigal
Represented By:	Scott Madison Riemer
Represented By:	Jennifer Lynn Steinbuch
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?