Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Marla Knudsen, et al v. MetLife Group Inc
as 23-2420
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARLA KNUDSEN and WILLIAM DUTRA, as representatives of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the MetLife Options & Choices Plan
Defendant / Appellee:
METLIFE GROUP INC
BLYSTONE v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
as 2:2023cv00574
Plaintiff:
ALICIA BLYSTONE
Defendant:
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY trading and doing business as METLIFE trading and doing business as METLIFE GROUP ADMINISTRATOR trading and doing business as METLIFE GROUP, INC.
KNUDSEN et al v. METLIFE GROUP, INC.
as 2:2023cv00426
Plaintiff:
MARLA KNUDSEN and WILLIAM DUTRA
Defendant:
METLIFE GROUP, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv03714
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2016cv00164
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Frank Reed v. Citigroup Inc, et al
as 15-2094
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FRANK REED
Defendant - Appellee:
CITIGROUP INC, in care of Plan Administrator of Citigroup Inc., METLIFE GROUP INC, a New York Corporation and METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO, a New York Corporation
REED v. CITIGROUP, INC. et al
as 3:2012cv02934
Plaintiff:
FRANK REED
Defendant:
CITIGROUP, INC., METLIFE GROUP, INC. and METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00732
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
MACHI v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY et al
as 2:2007cv01754
Plaintiff:
VINCENT MACHI
Defendant:
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, METLIFE GROUP INC. and METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Insurance Contract
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.
