Coleman

Coleman v. Hartford Life Insurance

Good Law
432 F. Supp. 2d 1030·2006 WL 1527118·2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39655
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMay 24, 2006CV 05-03614 FMCCalifornia2,101 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cooper, J.

ORDER RE: STANDARD OF REVIEW

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs Motion to Determine Standard of Review and for Order Allowing Augmentation of the Administrative Record in an ERISA matter (docket #34). The Court has read and considered the moving, opposition, reply, and sur-reply documents submitted in connection with this Motion. The Court deems this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 78; Local Rule 7-15. For the reasons set forth below, the Court concludes that the standard of review is de novo and denies without prejudice the Motion to Augment the Record.

I. SUMMARY OF FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

This action arises out of Plaintiffs attempts to obtain disability benefits pursuant to an ERISA plan.

The parties do not dispute that Plaintiff is a former employee of Continental Assurance Company (“CNA”) or that CNA denied Plaintiffs claim for short-term disability benefits in May 2004. Plaintiff did not apply for long-term disability benefits.

The parties are similarly in agreement with the characterization of Hartford Life Insurance Company (“Hartford”) as the successor-in-interest to CNA by virtue of Hartford’s purchase of…

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.