Feggins, Brenda v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company et al
Brenda Feggins |
Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company and St. Francis Hospital Group, Inc. Long Term Disability Insurance Program |
3:2011cv00073 |
January 26, 2011 |
US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin |
Madison Office |
Dane |
William M. Conley |
Stephen L. Crocker |
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1001 |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 66 JUDGMENT in favor of Brenda Feggins against Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, St. Francis Hospital Group, Inc. Long Term Disability Insurance Program in the amount of $ 23,021.35. (WMC / PAO). Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 9/12/2013. (voc) |
Filing 65 OPINION AND ORDER denying 9 Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, St. Francis Hospital Group, Inc. Long Term Disability Insurance Program; granting 12 Motion for Summary Judgment by Plaintiff Brenda F eggins; denying 57 Motion for Reconsideration. Plaintiff is awarded attorney fees in the amount of $23,021.35 as the prevailing party. This case is remanded to defendant Reliance Standard to conduct a full and fair review of plaintiff's qualification for benefits and determine the appropriate amount of benefits due, if any. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 9/5/2013. (arw) |
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 Wisconsin Western 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.