Duncan et al v. Minnesota Life Insurance Company
| Charlie Duncan and Janet Freel |
| Minnesota Life Insurance Company |
| 3:2017cv00025 |
| January 31, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Thomas M. Rose |
| Recovery of Overpayment and Enforcement of Judgment |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
81
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES 72 AND SUPPLEMENTAL APPLICATION FOR AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES 78 . Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 5-4-2021. (de)
|
|
Filing
68
ENTRY AND ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 64 . Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 4-16-2020. (de)
|
|
Filing
47
DECISION AND ENTRY - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: Minnesota Life shall produce to Plaintiffs unredacted copies of the document Minnesota Life has Bates stamped MC_000009, MC_000010, and MC_000011. The attorney-client privilege shields the remaining redacted communications identified in the privilege log Minnesota Life produced on 7/11/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 7/10/19. (kma)
|
|
Filing
46
ORDER GRANTING 45 Joint Motion to Set the Deadline for the Filing of Cross-Motions. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 7/9/19. (ep)
|
|
Filing
40
DECISION AND ENTRY - As to the withheld documents themselves, an in-camera review for privileged attorney-client information is straightforward. Each page of Defendants documents contains communications between Defendants personnel and in-house couns el. The communications request or provide legal advice, information, or opinion. Additionally, although Defendants did not include MLIC_000009 in its privilege log, there is no doubt that the last paragraph on this page contains information shielded by the attorney-client privilege. For these reasons, the attorney-client privilege applies to the documents identified in Defendants privilege log. And, consequently, Defendant is not required to produce to Plaintiffs the documents identified in its privilege log.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 6/6/19. (kma)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: Discovery shall proceed as set forth herein.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 4/9/18. (kma)
|
|
Filing
22
ORDER granting 16 Plaintiffs' Motion for Discovery. On or before January 19, 2018, Plaintiffs shall file a discovery plan, identifying the specific discovery they seek on the conflict-of-interest issues. Defendant may, if necessary, file a responsive Memorandum within seven days of the date Plaintiffs file their discovery plan. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 1/5/18. (mcm)
|
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 Ohio 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
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.
