Personal tools
Log in

Submit your case to Lawton and Cates for free evaluation

You are here: Home › Library › Class Action › CUNA Mutual Retirees Group › February 14, 2012 Update

February 14, 2012 Update

by Lori Kannenberg Dorn — last modified Feb 14, 2012 08:49 PM
A petition for certiorari has been filed in the U.S. Supreme Court for the CUNA Mutual retirees for the cancellation of payments for health insurance premiums. The petition and appendix are posted here.

A petition for certiorari has been  filed in the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the CUNA Mutual retirees for the cancellation of payments for health insurance premiums.  The petition and appendix can be accessed by clicking here.

CUNA Mutual has until March 12, 2012 to either respond or waive a response.  If they respond we have 10 days to reply.  If they waive a response the petition will be submitted to the Supreme Court.  A single justice can then ask CUNA Mutual for a response.  Ultimately it will take four of the nine justices to grant the petition for review.  The court’s decision on the petition is typically rendered about 30 days following the submission of all petitions, responses and replies.  If the Court accepts the petition it will take five justices to reverse the Seventh Circuit decision. We will keep you advised of the progress.

The Supreme Court takes only accepts a small number of petitions for certiorari.  However, we believe with the strong dissent of Judge Hamilton and with three other judges joining the dissent that this might be a case the Court would accept.

The granting of a petition usually relies upon issues of law, particularly where there is a split among circuit courts of appeals.  Therefore, our petition did not make the strong factual arguments that could have been made since they would not be important at this stage.

CUNA Mutual Retirees Class Action:

There will be periodic updates on this website with information about the progress of the case. However, since this website is open to the public, it will not contain confidential information. The plaintiffs are represented by the Madison law firm of Lawton & Cates, S.C. and the Chicago law firm of Daley, DeBofsky, & Bryant.