Lorena Agredano v. Mutual of Omaha Companies United of Omaha Life Insurance Company United Broadcasting Company

Good Law
75 F.3d 541
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 29, 199694-55714California1,588 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kozinski, J.

This is the postscript to Lorena Agredano’s lawsuit against Mutual of Omaha Companies, United of Omaha Life Insurance Company, and United Broadcasting Company PPO Plan. Agredano alleged these defendants violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., and state law, by refusing to reimburse her for the cost of her breast cancer treatment. The district court held a bench trial and, at the close of the evidence, indicated it would rule for Agredano. Before the court entered judgment, however, the parties settled the dispute — the dispute that gave rise to the lawsuit, that is.

The parties did not settle the issue of defendants’ liability to Agredano for attorney’s fees and costs. Agredano eventually filed a motion in the district court seeking to recover, as costs, approximately $10,000 for professional fees paid to her expert witnesses. She relied on ERISA § 502(g)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (g)(1), which authorizes cost-shifting in ERISA actions brought by plan participants and beneficiaries. The district court denied Agredano’s motion, stating that “[tjhere is no right to expert witness fees under ERISA.” ER Tab 11, at 5. Agredano…

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.