Araujo v. John Hancock Life Insurance

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “the Court may consider affidavits and other material beyond the pleadings to resolve the jurisdictional question”
• “[T]he alleged scheme ... goes to the value of the variable life insurance policy. In essence, the complaint alleges that the policyholders did not get what they thought they were getting, namely a full year of coverage”
• the insured’s inclusion of only contract breach and unjust enrichment claims against an insurer did not preclude SLU-SA removal and dismissal because the crux of the complaint was “misrepresentation of material fact” concerning “the value of policies”
• a variable universal life insurance policy was a “covered security” “because it invests in mutual funds which are regulated by the SEC” and “the plaintiff invested his premiums in a sub-account which is registered with the SEC under the Investment Company Act of 1940”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).