Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02915/USCOURTS-cand-4_05-cv-02915-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits

---

JOHN D. WOOD (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) THEO J. EMISON (SBN 209183) 

THE WOOD LAW FIRM, PLLC EMISON HULLVERSON BONAGOFSKY 

800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4100 425 Pacific Avenue 

Seattle, WA 98104 San Francisco, CA 94133 

Phone: (206) 447-1342 Telephone: (415) 434-2111 

Facsimile: (206) 470-1150 Facsimile: (415) 434-2112 

john@woodfirm.com temison@ehblaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff Attorneys for Plaintiff 

THERESA MONSEUR KELLY THERESA MONSEUR KELLY 

THOMAS M. HERLIHY (SBN 83615) 

SEAN P. NALTY (SBN 121253) 

KELLY, HERLIHY & KLEIN LLP 

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2500 

San Francisco, CA 94104-4217 

Telephone: (415) 951-0535 

Facsimile: (415) 391-7808 

nalty@kelher.com and herlihy@kelher.com 

Attorneys for Defendants 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

OF AMERICA, UNUMPROVIDENT CORPORATION, 

AND MDL HEALTH PLAN, 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

OAKLAND DIVISION 

THERESA MONSEUR KELLY, 

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 

OF AMERICA, UNUMPROVIDENT, 

CORPORATION, and MDL HEALTH PLAN, 

 Defendants. 

Case No. C 05-02915-CW 

 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF 

DISMISSAL AND REMAND THEREON 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL

AND REMAND THERON

The parties stipulate as follows: 

Case 4:05-cv-02915-CW Document 44 Filed 01/23/08 Page 1 of 5
This action has been stayed pursuant to the Court’s order to allow the defendant to 

reassess the plaintiff’s disability claim. The plaintiff elected to participate in the out-ofcourt reassessment process. That process has concluded, and the defendants have found 

in the plaintiff’s favor, reversing their previous decision to terminate disability benefits to 

the plaintiff. The defendants have paid past-due disability benefits and interest to the 

plaintiff and have reinstated her ongoing disability claim subject to the terms of the 

applicable plan. As a result of the reassessment, the Court will not need to rule upon the 

merits of this action or make substantive findings about the plaintiff’s disability claim or 

benefits. 

 The defendants have paid disability benefits and interest to the plaintiff up 

through December 22, 2007 (the most recent ongoing disability benefit check covers the 

period of November 23, 2007 to December 22, 2007). In addition, the parties have 

reached an agreement regarding the plaintiff’s claims for attorney’s fees and costs 

accruing in this action. Accordingly, the plaintiff agrees not to seek to recover from the 

defendants any additional benefits, interest, attorney’s fees, costs, or any other damages 

that have accrued up through December 22, 2007. In addition, the defendants agree not 

to seek to recover from the plaintiff any overpayment of benefits or offsets or any other 

damages, including attorney’s fees and costs, that have accrued up through December 22, 

2007. 

The parties stipulate that the plaintiff’s claims only as to benefits and damages 

that have accrued up through December 22, 2007 should be dismissed with prejudice. 

However, because the plaintiff’s claim has been reinstated on an ongoing basis, the 

parties stipulate that this dismissal will not apply to or affect the plaintiff’s rights to 

Case 4:05-cv-02915-CW Document 44 Filed 01/23/08 Page 2 of 5
continue to receive ongoing benefits from December 23, 2007 forward, for as long as she 

remains eligible subject to the terms of the applicable plan. The parties stipulate that the 

plaintiff’s reinstated disability claim should be remanded to the defendants without 

prejudice and administered on an ongoing basis (from December 23, 2007 forward) 

subject to the terms of the applicable plan. The parties stipulate that this dismissal will 

not waive, prejudice, or bar the plaintiff’s right to seek recovery from, or file suit against, 

the defendants should an issue or dispute arise regarding the plaintiff’s entitlement to 

benefits and damages, or the amount of benefits and damages, accruing from December 

23, 2007 forward: The defendants agree that, in the event that an issue or dispute arises, 

the defendants will not attempt to argue that any such suit by the plaintiff is barred by 

claim or issue preclusion (including res judicata or collateral estoppel). 

The parties also stipulate that all claims by the defendants against the plaintiff, 

including all claims for overpayment of benefits or offsets or any other damages that have 

accrued up through December 22, 2007, should be dismissed with prejudice. 

So stipulation by the parties: 

Dated: January 21, 2007 THE WOOD LAW FIRM, PLLC 

By John D. Wood 

 John D. Wood (Admitted Pro Hac Vice) 

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 THERESA MONSEUR KELLY 

 

Dated: January 21, 2007 EMISON, HULLVERSON, BONAGOFSKY 

By Theo J. Emison 

 Theo J. Emison 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 4:05-cv-02915-CW Document 44 Filed 01/23/08 Page 3 of 5
 THERESA MONSEUR KELLY 

Dated: January 21, 2007 KELLY, HERLIHY & KLEIN, LLP 

 By Thomas M. Herlihy (with permission)

 Thomas M. Herlihy 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF 

AMERICA, UNUM PROVIDENT 

CORPORATION, and MDL HEALTH PLAN

ORDER

 The Court accepts and adopts the stipulations of the parties as stated above. As a 

result of the reassessment process, the Court makes no findings or rulings on the merits of 

the claims and allegations by the parties in this action. 

It is ORDERED that the plaintiff’s claims only as to benefits and damages that 

have accrued up through December 22, 2007 are dismissed with prejudice. Based upon 

the parties’ stipulation, the plaintiff shall not be entitled to recover from the defendants 

any additional benefits, interest, attorney’s fees, costs, or any other damages that have 

accrued up through December 22, 2007. However, because the plaintiff’s claim has been 

reinstated by the defendants on an ongoing basis, this dismissal shall not apply to or 

affect the plaintiff’s rights to continue to receive ongoing benefits from December 23, 

2007 forward, for as long as she remains eligible subject to the terms of the applicable 

plan. This dismissal shall not waive, prejudice, or bar the plaintiff’s right to seek 

recovery from, or file suit against, the defendants regarding the plaintiff’s entitlement to 

benefits and damages, or the amount of benefits and damages, accruing from December 

23, 2007 forward, subject to the terms of the applicable plan. The plaintiff’s reinstated 

disability claim is remanded to the defendants without prejudice and shall be 

Case 4:05-cv-02915-CW Document 44 Filed 01/23/08 Page 4 of 5
administered on an ongoing basis (from December 23, 2007 forward) subject to the terms 

of the applicable plan. 

It is further ORDERED that all claims by the defendants against the plaintiff, 

including all claims for overpayment of benefits and offsets and any other damages that 

have accrued up through December 22, 2007, are dismissed with prejudice. 

In addition, as a result of an agreement between the parties regarding the payment 

of attorney’s fees and costs to the plaintiff, it is further ORDERED that the plaintiff shall 

not seek to recover any additional attorney’s fees or costs that have accrued in this action. 

It is so ORDERED. 

1/23/08 

___________________________________________ 

 CLAUDIA WILKEN, JUDGE OF THE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

Case 4:05-cv-02915-CW Document 44 Filed 01/23/08 Page 5 of 5