Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-15-30346/USCOURTS-ca5-15-30346-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ronald T. Alsup
Appellant
Provident Life & Accident Insurance Company
Appellee
Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Appellee
Unum Provident Corporation
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-30346

Summary Calendar

RONALD T. ALSUP, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA; PROVIDENT LIFE 

& ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY; UNUM PROVIDENT 

CORPORATION, 

 Defendants - Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Louisiana

USDC No. 5:13-CV-256

Before WIENER, HIGGINSON, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant Ronald T. Alsup, M.D., appeals the district court’s 

dismissal of this, his second lawsuit advancing his claim of total disability 

against Defendants-Appellees, Unum Life Insurance Company of America; 

Provident Life & Accident Insurance Company; and Unum Provident 

Corporation (collectively “Unum”) as issuers of a disability insurance policy 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 14, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 15-30346 Document: 00513192009 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/14/2015
No. 15-30346

2

governed by the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). We 

affirm.

Our review of the record on appeal, including the briefs and excerpts of 

the parties and the March 18, 2015 Memorandum Ruling of the district court, 

convinces us beyond cavil that the court’s Judgment of even date is not just 

free of reversible error, but is imminently correct. We are satisfied that, at 

bottom, it was Dr. Alsup, not Unum’s administrative review personnel, who 

was arbitrary and capricious throughout the course of that process. For 

essentially the reasons carefully and patiently explicated by the district court 

in its Memorandum Ruling, we affirm the above said Judgment.

AFFIRMED.

 Case: 15-30346 Document: 00513192009 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/14/2015