Wright v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, et al

Filing 17

ORDER granting 8 Consent MOTION to Substitute Party filed by Metlife Insurance Company USA, Inc. - Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 1/17/2017. (Tripp, S.)

Download PDF
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION TRISHA L. WRIGHT, Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 5:17-cv-00014- FL v. METLIFE INSURANCE COMPANY USA, INC., a Delaware Corporation, PELNIK INSURANCE OF CARY, NC, INC., and C.W. BURKE, ORDER Defendant. This cause coming to be heard upon request by Defendant MetLife Insurance Company USA, Inc., with consent of Plaintiff as well as co-defendants Pelnik Insurance of Cary, NC, Inc., and C.W. Burke, and the parties having advised the Court that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, rather than MetLife Insurance Company USA, Inc., issued Group Policy Number TM 05910791-G, which is the subject matter of this action, and is the proper defendant in this case, said parties have further agreed that a substitution of parties can be made without the necessity of Plaintiff filing an amended complaint. Based on the foregoing, and with the consent of all parties, it is ORDERED as follows: (a) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is hereby substituted for MetLife Insurance Company USA, Inc., as the named defendant in this action; and 1 (b) It shall not be necessary for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint; rather, all references in Plaintiff’s Complaint to “MetLife Insurance Company USA, Inc.,” or “Defendant MetLife” shall be deemed references to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; (c) In addition, service which has previously been made upon MetLife Insurance Company USA, Inc. shall be deemed proper service on Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. IT IS SO ORDERED. This the ___ day of January, 2017. 17th __________________________________ LOUISE W. FLANAGAN United States District Judge 2

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?