No. 22-6720
Angela Bakos v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
IFP
Tags: benefits-suit civil-rights due-process employee-benefits erisa limitation-period notice notice-requirement procedural-requirement statute-of-limitations statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA SocialSecurity
Arbitration ERISA SocialSecurity
Latest Conference:
2023-04-14
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Respondent UNUM was required to provide Petitioner BAKOS with actual notice of the limitations period under ERISA
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether Respondent UNUM was required under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et. seq., to provide Petitioner BAKOS with actual, as opposed to constructive, notice that there was in existence a three-year period of limitation within which suits for denial of benefits must be filed in court.
Docket Entries
2023-04-17
Petition DENIED.
2023-03-23
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/14/2023.
2023-03-09
Brief of respondent Unum Life Insurance Company of America in opposition filed.
2023-01-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 9, 2023)
Attorneys
Unum Life Insurance Company
Nikole Marie Crow — Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Respondent
Nikole Marie Crow — Womble Bond Dickinson (US) LLP, Respondent