Facts
- Cynthia R. Salaises claims to be a beneficiary of a life insurance policy issued to Sergio Aguilar, whose initial beneficiary was his wife, Anita Aguilar [lines="24-28"].
- Sergio Aguilar and Anita Aguilar divorced in 2009, but the divorce decree did not revive Anita's beneficiary status under the policy [lines="87-95"].
- Plaintiff submitted a claim for benefits under the policy in September 2023, which was subsequently denied by the Defendant [lines="103-106"].
- The life insurance policy requires "proof of death" but does not specifically define what that entails [lines="108-111"].
- Plaintiff argues that both statutory and common law presumptions of death apply, given that the insured has been absent for over seven years [lines="204-206"].
Issues
- Whether Plaintiff has standing to bring the breach of contract action under the policy as a beneficiary following the divorce [lines="121-125"].
- Whether Plaintiff provided sufficient proof of death as required under the terms of the life insurance policy [lines="181-183"].
- Whether the Plaintiff's claim for bad faith against the Defendant is viable based on the alleged breach of contract [lines="218"].
Holdings
- The Court held that Plaintiff has standing as the primary beneficiary under the policy after the revocation of the previous beneficiary's status due to the divorce [lines="143-145"].
- The Court found that Plaintiff adequately alleged facts invoking the presumption of death, thus her claim regarding proof of death was sufficiently pled [lines="211-215"].
- The Court granted the motion regarding Plaintiff's bad faith claim, concluding that the allegations were too conclusory and lacked sufficient factual support [lines="278"].
OPINION
Case Information
\J_ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., ex
rel. URI BASSAN, r-_A/'- r
Plaintiffs, V.
OMNICARE, INC.,
Defendant.
Case No. 15-CV-4179-CM-VF 0. C
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
7)~ Plaintiff,
V.
OMNICARE, INC. and CVS HEALTH CORP.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF DE~NDANTS' MOTION TO SEAL REPLY IN SUPPOR.-'YOF OBJECTIONS E ·n ainigi (pro hac vice) Holly Conley (pro hac vice) William Ashworth (pro hac vice) David Randall J. Riskin (pro hac vice) Benjamin Hazelwood (Bar No. 5001508) WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP 680 Mаine Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20024 (202) 434-5000 For matters in New York: 650 Fifth Avenue Suite 1500 New York, NY Attorneys for Omnicare, Inc. and CVS Health Corporation USDCSDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRO~lCA LL Y FILED I . DOC#: r DATE FILED: - b_/?Jl~ if I Cаse 1:15-cv-04179-CM-VF Document 418 Filed 12/11/23 Pagе 2 of 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFENDANTS REQUEST SEALING NOTWITHSTANDING RESERVATIONS .................. 1
[1] Consistent with the Court's Individual Practices and Procedures Rule V(D), Defendants are in cluding a Table of Contents and a Table of Authorities.
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES CASES
Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga,
DEFENDANTS REQUEST SEALING NOTWITHSTANDING RESERVATIONS
Omnicare, Inc. and CVS Health Corporation's (tоgether, "Omnicare") reply in support of
their objections to Judge Figueredo 's Octobеr 25, 2023 order (ECF 370) cites to and quotes from
materials the U. S. Attorney's Offiсe has designated confidential under the protectivе order, and
which Judge Figueredo sealed below. Omnicarе disagrees these materials should be sealed-in
cluding because they demonstrate the Office's public criticisms of Omniсare's practices are mer
itless.
See generally Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga,
Case 1:15-cv-04179-CM-VF Doсument 418 Filed 12/11/23 Page 5 of 5 Dated: Dеcember 11 , 2023 Respectfully submittеd,
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP Isl Enu Mainigi Enu Mainigi (pro hac vice) Holly Conley (pro hac vice) William Ashworth (pro hac vice) David Randall J. Riskin (pro hac vice) Benjamin Hazelwood (Bar Nо. 5001508) 680 Maine Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20024 (202) 434-5000 For matters in New York: 650 Fifth A venue Suite 1500 New Yоrk, NY 10019 Attorneys for Omnicare, Inc. and CVS Health Cor poration