Hinton v. Pacific Enterprises

Good Law
5 F.3d 391·93 Daily Journal DAR 11867·26 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1406·1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 23843·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6956
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 17, 199307-17052California3,379 words

Opinion

Opinion

5 F.3d 391 26 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1406 Heather C. HINTON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PACIFIC ENTERPRISES, formerly known as Pacific Lighting Corporation, as Employer, Plan Administrator, Plan Sponsor and Plan Fiduciary, Pacific Lighting Corporation Disability Benefit Plan, Pacific Lighting Corporation Medical Plan, Pacific Lighting Corporation Dental Plan, Pacific Lighting Corporation Pension Plan, Pacific Lighting Corporation Life Insurance Plan, and Kathe R. Moore, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-55493. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 4, 1993. Decided Sept. 17, 1993. Ronald Dean, Pacific Palisades, CA, and Stephanie Nordlinger, Los Angeles, CA, for plaintiff-appellant. Larry I. Stein and John R. Ellis, Los Angeles, CA, for defendants-appellees Pacific Enterprises, Pacific Lighting Corp. Disability Benefit Plan, Pacific Lighting Corp. Medical Plan, Pacific Lighting Corp. Dental Plan, Pacific Lighting Corp. Pension Plan, and Pacific Lighting Corp. Life Ins. Plan. Kathe R. Moore, in pro. per. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before: BROWNING, FARRIS and KELLY * , Circuit Judges. PAUL KELLY, Jr.,…

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.