United States Sixth Circuit

Preliminary injunction requiring the continued payment of the health care benefits by a defendant to plaintiffs is affirmed where the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding plaintiffs were likely to succeed on their claim that their health care benefits are fully vested for life, and correctly interpreted a contract on an indemnity claim.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/17/2006
• Published 01/17/2006

Judges

• Before:  MARTIN, COLE, and GILMAN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  Bobby R. Burchfield, McDermott, Will & Emery, Washington, D.C., Stephanie J. Goldstein, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, New York, New York, for Defendants.  Roger J. McClow, Klimist, McKnight, Sale, McClow & Canzano, Southfield, Michigan, for Plaintiffs.   ON BRIEF:  Bobby R. Burchfield, Jason A. Levine, Douglas G. Edelschick, McDermott, Will & Emery, Washington, D.C., Stephanie J. Goldstein, Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, New York, New York, Thomas G. Kienbaum, Noel D. Massie, William B. Forrest III, Kienbaum, Opperwall, Hardy & Pelton, Birmingham, Michigan, Norman C. Ankers, Honigan, Miller, Schwartz, and Cohn, Detroit, Michigan, for Defendants.  Roger J. McClow, Samuel C. McKnight, Klimist, McKnight, Sale, McClow & Canzano, Southfield, Michigan, for Plaintiffs.