Hsieh Lewis v. Life Insurance Company, No. 13-1980 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-1980 HSIEH LEWIS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, Defendant Appellee, and KRATOS DEFENSE CORPORATION, & SECURITY SOLUTIONS, INC.; CIGNA Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, Senior District Judge. (1:12-cv-01012-TSE-TCB) Submitted: May 30, 2014 Decided: July 3, 2014 Before WILKINSON, KING, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. Michael Hannon, HANNON LAW GROUP, Washington, Appellant. Walter L. Williams, WILSON, ELSER, EDELMAN & DICKER LLP, McLean, Virginia, for Appellee. D.C., for MOSKOWITZ, Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Hsieh Lewis appeals from the district court s order granting summary judgment to Life Insurance Company of North America ( LICNA ) in her civil action alleging breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ( ERISA ) under based her on LICNA s husband s denial of her employer-sponsored claim life for benefits insurance policy. Finding no reversible error, we affirm. We review a district court s grant of summary judgment de novo, drawing reasonable inferences favorable to the non-moving party. in the light most Dulaney v. Packaging Corp. of Am., 673 F.3d 323, 330 (4th Cir. 2012). Summary judgment is proper if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). Only disputes over facts affect that governing might law judgment. (1986). will the outcome properly of preclude the the suit entry under of the summary Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 To withstand a motion for summary judgment, the non-moving party must produce competent evidence to reveal the existence of See Thompson a genuine v. Potomac issue of Elec. material Power Co., fact 312 for F.3d trial. 645, 649 (4th Cir. 2002) ( Conclusory or speculative allegations do not suffice, nor does a mere scintilla of evidence in support of 3 [the non-moving party s] case. (internal quotation marks omitted)). After review of the record and the parties briefs, we conclude that the district court granting summary judgment to LICNA. did not reversibly err in Under the plain language of the policy, see Wheeler v. Dynamic Eng g, Inc., 62 F.3d 634, 638 (4th Cir. 1995), Lewis husband was not entitled to benefits. We also reject Lewis as arguments meritless that and LICNA unsupported was bound by by the an evidence eligibility determination made by her husband s employer and that the life insurance policy was ambiguous and should have been construed in her favor. Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. * We dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * In view of our disposition, we need not address LICNA s alternative argument that Lewis claim for relief under the ERISA was barred by her failure to exhaust administrative remedies. 4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
