Meade v. Kroger Limited Partnership I

How courts have described this case

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

• involving disability insurance provision and expressly distinguishing statutes concerning group life insurance contracts, for which there is the additional concern of giving insureds an opportunity to correct misstatements during their lifetime
• striking new evidence submitted in reply that should have 22 been introduced in opening brief and noting general rule that a “movant may not raise new facts or arguments in his reply brief.”
• “The parties do not dispute that the Master 9 Policy under which Plaintiff’s Certificate of Insurance was issued contains a choice-of-law 10 provision providing that it is issued and governed under the laws of Virginia.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).