Welsh

Welsh v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Good Law
246 F. App'x 405
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 13, 2007No. 05-36166California603 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

David L. Welsh, a former accountant at Deloitte & Touche (“Deloitte”), appeals from the district court’s judgment denying his claim for disability benefits under a plan administered by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) and regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(1)(B). We vacate and remand.

Mr. Welsh is incorrect that the district court failed to comply with the mandate of the order this Court issued in Welsh I. That order was addressed to the District Court for the Central District of California, in which Mr. Welsh filed Welsh I, not to the District Court for the Western District of Washington, which issued the judgment under review in this appeal. Our order in Welsh I instructed the District Court for the Central District of California *406 on remand to “order MetLife to reexamine Welsh’s claim applying the correct definition of disability and allow Welsh to supply records as necessary.” Mr. Welsh admits, in his Opening Brief, that the District Court for the Central District of California instructed MetLife accordingly. Although Mr. Welsh contends that the District Court for the Western…

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.