Cervantes

Cervantes v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Good Law
388 F. Supp. 2d 1164·2005 WL 1712274·2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37361
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 18, 2005Civ.S 03-1672 MCEPANCalifornia2,157 words

Opinion

Opinion

England, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Through the present action, Plaintiff Elvira Cervantes (“Plaintiff’) alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et. seq. (“ERISA”), when it denied her application for disability insurance benefits under her employer’s group short term disability policy. MetLife now moves for summary judgement as to Plaintiffs claim. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s summary judgment motion is granted.

BACKGROUND

At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff was employed as a personal banker for Wells Fargo Bank (“Wells Fargo”). As part of Wells Fargo’s employee benefits package, Plaintiff was entitled to participate in its group short term disability plan (the “Plan”).

Wells Fargo both sponsors the Plan and acts as Plan Administrator. The Plan Administrator has full discretionary authority to administer and interpret the Plan. (Undisputed Fact No. 5). Wells Fargo has delegated its authority to receive, process and administer benefit claims to MetLife as the Plan Claims Administrator. (Undisputed Facts Nos. 5 & 6).

The Plan provides for payments as a result of an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.