Burke

Burke v. Pitney Bowes Inc. Long Term Disability Plan

Good Law
640 F. Supp. 2d 1160·2009 WL 1916968·2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56731
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 1, 2009C 04-4483 MHPCalifornia7,294 words

Opinion

Opinion

Patel, J.

Re: Cross-Motions for Judgment

Plaintiff Cara A. Burke seeks, pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), review of the decision of defendant Pitney Bowes Inc. Long Term Disability Plan (“the Plan”) to deny Burke long term disability (“LTD”) benefits. The action was initially filed in late 2004. On January 3, 2006, 2006 WL 13097 , this court denied Burke’s motion for summary judgment, granted the Plan’s motion for summary judgment, and entered judgment for the Plan. See Docket No. 38. Burke subsequently appealed. While her appeal was pending, the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit had occasion to revisit and substantially revise the legal standards pertaining to structural conflicts of interest in ERISA cases. In light of these changes in the law, on September 19, 2008, the Court of Appeals vacated this court’s earlier judgment and remanded the action for consideration under the appropriate legal standards. See Burke v. Pitney Bowes Inc. Long-Term Disability Plan, 544 F.3d 1016 (9th Cir.2008).

Now before the court are the parties’ cross-motions for judgment on the limited issue of whether the Plan…

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.