Bernardo Sanchez v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaSeptember 2, 20222:20-cv-03732California7,661 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

Case 2:20-cv-03732-JWH-JEM Document Filed 09/02/ Page 1 of Page ID #:1709

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BERNARDO SANCHEZ, Case No. 2:20-cv-03732-JWH-JEM

Plaintiff,

FINDINGS OF FACT AND

v. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PURSUANT TO RULE 52(a) OF HARTFORD LIFE & ACCIDENT THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL INSURANCE CO.; and PROCEDURE DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

Defendants.

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Case 2:20-cv-03732-JWH-JEM Document Filed 09/02/ Page 2 of Page ID #:1710

I. INTRODUCTION This case concerns an ERISA claim that Plaintiff Bernardo Sanchez asserts against Defendant Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co., through which Sanchez seeks short-term and long-term disability benefits. Sanchez was an employee of non-party Illinois Tool Works Inc. (“ITW”). ITW’s disability benefits plans were administered by non-party Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”). Defendant Hartford acquired Aetna’s group…

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.