From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heimeshoff v. Life

Supreme Court of the United States
Apr 15, 2013
569 U.S. 917 (2013)

Summary

In Heimeshoff, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on the issue of when a statute of limitations should accrue for judicial review of an ERISA disability adverse benefit determination.

Summary of this case from Barnett v. Southern California Edison Company Long Term Disability Plan

Opinion

No. 12–729.

2013-04-15

Julie HEIMESHOFF, petitioner, v. HARTFORD LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE, CO., et al.


Case below, 496 Fed.Appx. 129.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.


Summaries of

Heimeshoff v. Life

Supreme Court of the United States
Apr 15, 2013
569 U.S. 917 (2013)

In Heimeshoff, the Supreme Court granted certiorari on the issue of when a statute of limitations should accrue for judicial review of an ERISA disability adverse benefit determination.

Summary of this case from Barnett v. Southern California Edison Company Long Term Disability Plan
Case details for

Heimeshoff v. Life

Case Details

Full title:Julie HEIMESHOFF, petitioner, v. HARTFORD LIFE & ACCIDENT INSURANCE, CO.…

Court:Supreme Court of the United States

Date published: Apr 15, 2013

Citations

569 U.S. 917 (2013)
569 U.S. 917
185 L. Ed. 2d 810
81 U.S.L.W. 3573

Citing Cases

Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.

We granted certiorari to resolve a split among the Courts of Appeals on the enforceability of this common…

Watkins v. JPMorgan Chase U.S. Benefits Exec.

B. The Plan Administrator's decision was not arbitrary and capricious Watkins' claim that a decision by the…