Lowell

Lowell v. United Behavioral Health

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 29, 20204:20-cv-01989California1,397 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 TAMAR LOWELL, ET AL., CASE NO. 20-cv-01989-YGR

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO TRANSFER

vs. Re: Dkt. No. 20 UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, ET AL., Defendants.

Plaintiffs Tamar and Thomas Lowell bring this action under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) on behalf of themselves and their beneficiary son, A.L., related to a denial of benefits under an employee welfare benefit plan. Now before the Court is a motion to transfer this action to either the United States District Courts for the District of Washington or the District of Montana, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 1404(a) and 29 U.S.C. section 1132(e)(2), filed by defendants United Behavioral Health (“UBH”) and United Healthcare Insurance Company. “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.” 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a). If the action could…

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.