Haddad, M.D. v. SMG Long Term Disability Plan et al
Filing
58
STIPULATION and ORDER RE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT signed by William H Orrick, III on 5/22/2019. (Zignago, K.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
LAW OFFICES OF LAURENCE F. PADWAY
Laurence F. Padway (SBN 89314)
1516 Oak Street, Suite 109
Alameda, CA 94501
Tel: 510.814.6100
Fax: 510.814.0650
Attorneys for Plaintiff Fadi G. Haddad, M.D.
Michael B. Bernacchi (SBN 163657)
E-mail: mbernacchi@bwslaw.com
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP
444 South Flower Street, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2953
Tel: 213.236.0600
Fax: 213.236.2700
Attorneys for Defendant Hartford Life and Accident
Insurance Company
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA – SACRAMENTO
13
14
FADI G. HADDAD, M.D.,
15
Case No. 2:16-cv-01700-WHO
Plaintiff,
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER RE SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT
16
v.
17
SMG LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN,
AND HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT
INSURANCE COMPANY,
18
Defendants.
19
20
21
RECITALS
22
23
WHEREAS, Dr. Haddad claims disability under a group disability policy (number
24
GVL-16008) (Policy) issued by Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company as part of
25
an employee welfare benefit plan subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security
26
Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).
27
WHEREAS, Dr. Haddad filed this lawsuit seeking disability benefits from Hartford
28
captioned Fadi G. Haddad, M.D. v. SMG Long-Term Disability Plan and Hartford Life
LA #4814-8451-9575 v1
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-1700-WHO
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
1
and Accident Insurance Company, now pending as Case No. 2:16-cv-01700-WHO in the
2
United States District Court, Eastern District of California [Docket 42].
3
WHEREAS, Dr. Haddad’s claim for Short-Term Disability (“STD”) benefits from
4
Hartford was litigated in the District Court to judgment [Docket 35] and appealed to the
5
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which reversed the judgment and remanded the case back
6
to the District Court with instructions on January 22, 2019 [Docket 42].
7
WHEREAS, Hartford claims an offset to the Short-Term and Long-Term
8
Disability benefits provided by the Policy based upon Dr. Haddad’s settlement of a
9
personal injury lawsuit captioned Haddad v. Hilton Worldwide Holdings, Inc., et al.,
10
United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:16-cv-00405-
11
MCE-CKD, and Dr. Haddad disputes said entitlement.
12
WHEREAS, the settlement agreement between Dr. Haddad and Hilton contains a
13
confidentiality provision which precludes Dr. Haddad from providing that agreement to
14
Hartford absent a court order.
15
WHEREAS, Dr. Haddad and Hartford agree that production of the settlement
16
agreement would facilitate Hartford’s analysis of its entitlement to an offset, and Hartford
17
has agreed to be bound by the confidentiality provision in the settlement agreement to the
18
same extent that the parties to the Hilton settlement are bound. Accordingly, counsel for
19
Dr. Haddad believes that Hartford is entitled to an order for production of the Hilton
20
settlement agreement. See Ex Parte Uppercu, 239 U.S. 435 (1915).
21
WHEREAS, although the settlement agreement between Dr. Haddad and Hilton
22
does not require notice to Hilton prior to the seeking of a court order for disclosure of the
23
agreement, counsel for Dr. Haddad has nonetheless twice emailed and twice left voice
24
mail messages for counsel for Hilton, the earliest of which was on May 9, 2019, advising
25
Hilton’s counsel of Hartford’s request to see the settlement agreement and offering
26
counsel for Hilton the opportunity to object and be heard on the matter. Counsel for
27
Hilton has not responded to these emails and voice mails.
28
LA #4814-8451-9575 v1
-2-
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-1700-WHO
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
1
WHEREAS, Hartford has agreed not to claim an offset to the Short Term
2
Disability benefits provided by the Policy based on the Hilton settlement, provided that
3
(1) the settlement agreement is provided to Hartford and (2) Hartford reserves its right to
4
claim any offset to which it may be entitled against any Long Term Disability benefits
5
which may be due to Dr. Haddad.
6
STIPULATION
7
Now, therefore the parties stipulate that the Court order:
8
1. Dr. Haddad shall promptly produce the settlement agreement in the Hilton case
9
to counsel for Hartford.
10
2. Hartford, SMG Long Term Disability Plan, and their counsel shall be bound by
11
the confidentiality provisions of the settlement agreement to the same extent
12
that Dr. Haddad and Hilton are bound.
13
3. Any party to this stipulation, or Hilton, may move for an order that the Hilton
14
settlement agreement be filed under seal in this action. The Court may or may
15
not grant such motion.
16
4. Hartford shall promptly produce all of its policies and procedures pertaining to
17
the offset of third party settlements for the relevant time period at issue,
18
including how Hartford determines the amount of the settlement it attributes to
19
lost earnings when the settlement is for a lump sum.
20
21
Dated: May 21, 2019
Law Offices of Laurence F. Padway
22
By: /s/ Laurence F. Padway
Laurence F. Padway
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Fadi G. Haddad, M.D.
23
24
25
26
27
28
LA #4814-8451-9575 v1
-3-
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-1700-WHO
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
1
Dated: May 21, 2019
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
2
By: /s/ Michael B. Bernacchi
Michael B. Bernacchi
Attorneys for Defendant
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company
3
4
5
6
7
8
ATTESTATION PURSUANT TO GENERAL ORDER 45
I, Michael B. Bernacchi, attest that concurrence in the filing of this document has been
obtained from the other Signatory.
9
By: /s/ Michael B. Bernacchi
Michael B. Bernacchi
10
11
12
ORDER
13
14
IT IS SO ORDERED.
15
16
Dated: _May 22, 2019__________
____________________________________
Honorable William H. Orrick
United States District Judge
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LA #4814-8451-9575 v1
-4-
CASE NO. 2:16-CV-1700-WHO
STIPULATION AND ORDER RE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?