Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00208/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-00208-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 150
Nature of Suit: Overpayments &amp; Enforcement of Judgments
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

– 1 – 

 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY PENDING LITIGATION

Tamara L. Boeck, Esq. (SBN: 166939) 

BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY 

1415 L Street, Suite 1000 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

(916) 930-2500 

(916) 930-2501 

tami.boeck@bullivant.com

Attorneys for HARTFORD LIFE AND 

ACCIDENT INSURANCE CO.; THE 

HARTFORD; and MERCURY INSURANCE 

COMPANY 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO DIVISION 

TANYA HANCOCK, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT 

INSURANCE CO.; THE HARTFORD; 

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY; AND 

DOES 1 TO 100, Inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: 2:06-CV-00208-FCD-DAD 

STIPULATION AND 

ORDER TO STAY LITIGATION 

PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW

The Plaintiff and Defendants do hereby agree and STIPULATE to stay this proceeding 

120 days to allow the Plaintiff to exhaust her administrative remedies under The Hartford Plan 

that is the subject of this litigation. The general rule in the Ninth Circuit is that a claimant must 

exhaust an ERISA plan’s internal review procedures before seeking recovery of such benefits in 

court. Amato v. Bernard, 618 F2d 559, 566-68 (9th Cir 1980); and Diaz v. United Agricultural 

Employee Welfare Benefit Plan, 50 F3d 1478, 1483 (9th Cir 1995) (citing Amato, supra). 

Here, both the Plaintiff and Defendants agree that Plaintiff shall pursue an appeal of the 

denial of her claim for disability, based on her denial letter dated February 5, 2004, and that this 

action shall be stayed for 120 days, or the earlier or later date of a final decision by The 

Case 2:06-cv-00208-FCD-DAD Document 19 Filed 06/29/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 

– 2 – 

 

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO STAY PENDING LITIGATION

Hartford. Neither the Plaintiff nor the Defendants shall waive any claims nor rights by staying 

the litigation and resuming the administrative procedure. 

Dated: June 21, 2006 BULLVANT HOUSER BAILEY 

 A Professional Corporation 

 By /s/ 

 Tamara L. Boeck, Esq. 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

 

Dated: June 21, 2006 MASTAGNI, HOLSTEDT, AMICK 

 By /s/ 

 Amanda Uhrhammer, Esq.. 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

PURSUANT TO THE STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 29, 2006 /s/ Frank C. Damrell Jr. 

 Judge of the U.S. District Court 

Case 2:06-cv-00208-FCD-DAD Document 19 Filed 06/29/06 Page 2 of 2