Doe

Doe v. LIFE INS. CO. OF NORTH AMERICA (LINA)

Good Law
737 F. Supp. 2d 1033·2010 WL 3340859·2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87670
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 25, 2010C 09-01665 LBCalifornia5,829 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beeler, J.

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [ECF No. 51]

I. INTRODUCTION

In this ERISA action, Plaintiff John Doe, a former employee of Excite, Inc., moved for summary judgment that he is covered under Excite’s life insurance policy (administered by LINA), and that he does not have to pay insurance premiums because he is disabled under the plan. Plaintiff’s Summary Judgment Motion, ECF No. 51 at 11-15. Defendants counter as follows: (A) the policy provides for waiver of the premiums and continued coverage for disabled employees only if there is a timely claim within 30 days of disability; (B) Plaintiff should have made — and did not make — a claim in 1997 for the waiver of the premiums and continued coverage, and thus his coverage under the policy lapsed; and (C) Excite cancelled the policy in June 1999, and requiring LINA to provide coverage now is actual and substantial prejudice under California’s notice-prejudice rule, which allows an insurer to avoid liability based on untimely notice of a claim only if the insurer shows actual, substantial prejudice due to the late notice. Defendants’ Opposition, ECF No. 54 at 1-2.

The Court GRANTS IN PART Plaintiffs Summary Judgment…

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.