Cases 21 - 28 of 28
LARKO v. FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al
as 3:2011cv00009
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL P. LARKO
Defendant:
FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and FIRST UNUM APPEALS UNIT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
TAYLOR v. GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF INFORMATION BUILDERS, INC. et al
as 2:2010cv05389
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS TAYLOR
Defendant:
GROUP LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF INFORMATION BUILDERS, INC. and FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
HOLLAND v. FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
as 3:2010cv01112
Plaintiff:
BARBARA HOLLAND
Defendant:
FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
COTO v. UNUM PROVIDENT et al
as 2:2008cv01474
Plaintiff:
SLAVICA COTO
Defendant:
UNUM PROVIDENT and FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. ABRAMS et al
as 2:2008cv01070
Plaintiff:
FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Defendant:
STEVEN ABRAMS, GLEN MOTORS,INC., JOSEPH RAVESE and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
GRASSELNO v. FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al
as 2:2008cv00635
Plaintiff:
JAMES GRASSELNO
Defendant:
FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and MORGAN STANLEY AND DEAN WITTER & CO. LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
DOUGHERTY v. UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION et al
as 2:2007cv00840
Plaintiff:
EDWARD J. DOUGHERTY
Defendant:
UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION, FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
FELDMAN v. UNUM et al
as 2:2007cv01676
Plaintiff:
ROBERT E. FELDMAN and ROBERT E. FELDMAN
Defendant:
UNUM, UNUM PROVIDENT CORPORATION, UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
