Court Finds CIGNA Failed To Follow Proper Claim Denial Procedure, Nurse's Right To Pursue Disability Law Suit Under ERISA Supported

Linda Chavis filed a complaint against Cigna Group Insurance and Life Insurance Company of North America (LINA) on June 24, 2009, alleging that the insurance company had breached two disability insurance contracts by refusing to pay her claims for short-term disability (STD) insurance and for long-term disability (LTD) insurance. While Cigna filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, Chavis stated in her complaint that she and her employer had paid all the required premiums for both policies, but she had been wrongfully denied benefits for both policies.

Click here to continue reading Court Finds CIGNA Failed To Follow Proper Claim Denial Procedure, Nurse's Right To Pursue Disability Law Suit Under ERISA Supported

Prudential's Failure To Produce Documents Weighs In Long Term Disability Claimant's Favor

In a ruling filed on November 17, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit found that Prudential Insurance Company of America (Prudential) had failed to provide Barbara Brown adequate information with which to appeal their decision to deny her long term disability (LTD) benefits. As a result, the court did not apply a common court-approved practice which demands that all administrative options must be exhausted before filing suit.

Click here to continue reading Prudential's Failure To Produce Documents Weighs In Long Term Disability Claimant's Favor

Third Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Hartford's Denial Of Long-Term Disability Claim Based on Pre-Existing Condition Defense

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently rendered a very difficult decision in favor of Hartford Insurance Company dealing with the interpretation of pre-existing condition clauses in long-term disability income policies. The three judge panel ruled 2-1 in favor of upholding Hartford’s denial of disability benefits. The law in each state is different for pre-existing conditions, therefore a disability claimant should consult with a disability insurance attorney prior to filing a claim for benefits.

In the case we are going to consider here, Jay Doroshow v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, two judges found Hartford had been neither capricious nor arbitrary when the insurance company denied Doroshow’s claim for long-term unemployment. The third judge disagreed, arguing in his dissent that Doroshow had not received treatment for the condition that precipitated his claim with Hartford. We will have to look at the backdrop against which this case developed.

Click here to continue reading Third Circuit Court of Appeals Upholds Hartford's Denial Of Long-Term Disability Claim Based on Pre-Existing Condition Defense

A General Surgeon And His Legal Team At Attorneys Dell & Schaefer Win Disability Insurance Jury Trial Against Unum

In a federal court in Peoria, Illinois, a jury ruled against Unum Company (NYSE: UNM)and awarded more than $300,000 in disability insurance benefits the insurer withheld from a general surgeon it had claimed was capable of conducting major surgeries, despite the surgeon’s difficulty standing for more than one hour at a time.

The eight-person jury, which included an employee from State Farm Insurance, headquartered nearby, ruled that Dr. Yogihn Parikh, who was a general surgeon at Hammond Henry Hospital in Genesco Il, was partially disabled, and as such was entitled to long-term disability benefits Unum had withheld under the disability insurance policy that Parikh purchased from them.

Click here to continue reading A General Surgeon And His Legal Team At Attorneys Dell & Schaefer Win Disability Insurance Jury Trial Against Unum

Arizona Court Reverses Reliance Standard And Awards Disability Benefits to Woman Suffering From Fibromyalgia

After receiving disability benefits for more than 10 years, the Reliance Standard denied disability benefits. After a 4 year legal battle, the Arizona district court determined that Melisa Gemmel was disabled by fibromyalgia. Melissa Gemmel was employed at Systemhouse, Inc. and covered under her employer’s long-term disability plan, issued by Reliance Standard (NYSE:DFG). In 1989, it was discovered that Gemmel suffered from osteophytes in the neural canal at C5-6, a posterior osteophyte at C5-6, and a C7-T1 abnormality.

Click here to continue reading Arizona Court Reverses Reliance Standard And Awards Disability Benefits to Woman Suffering From Fibromyalgia

Texas Court Rules That Hartford Wins Long-term Disability Case, Claimant Failed To Exhaust Administrative Remedies

It is vital that you hire the right long-term disability firm to represent you. Debra Swanson had to learn this the hard way, as a recent ruling in the Fifth Circuit court of Appeals in the Southern District of Texas demonstrates. How did Swanson’s attorney fail her? Her counsel failed to file a proper appeal.

Swanson’s story begins in January of 2002, when she was approved for long-term disability benefits through her employer’s plan with Hartford Life Insurance Co. (“Hartford”). The following year, on April 4, 2003, Hartford notified Swanson that her benefits would be terminated because she had been cleared to return to full-time work. She had 180 days to appeal this determination.

Click here to continue reading Texas Court Rules That Hartford Wins Long-term Disability Case, Claimant Failed To Exhaust Administrative Remedies

After Claimant Paid Premiums For 15 Years, Northwestern Mutual Rescinds Disability Policy

When you apply for a disability policy, it is very important to answer all questions as truthfully as you can. The courts generally will not render a summary judgment in favor of the disability insurance company if the company can’t prove that you answered a question with the intent to defraud. If you don’t have a solid explanation for why you answered a question falsely, you may find yourself losing your coverage or facing a jury trial to determine whether you should receive your long-term disability benefits or not.

This is what happened to Richard Koch. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company filed a motion in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington for a summary judgment against Mr. Koch and rescission of his disability policies.. At issue? Three disability insurance policies that Koch had purchased from Northwestern Mutual.

Click here to continue reading After Claimant Paid Premiums For 15 Years, Northwestern Mutual Rescinds Disability Policy

Sun Life Ordered To Re-Evaluate Long-Term Disability Benefit Denial By Federal Judge

When Vickie Costello left work on May 19, 2006, after a stressful encounter with one of her co-workers, she had no idea that her problems were going to get even worse. In order to return to her job at Logan Aluminum, Inc., her employer required her to sign a “last chance agreement.” Already suffering from debilitating pain for which she had been under a physician’s care since 1999, Ms. Costello felt that this event marked the time to claim disability through her employer’s long-term disability plan with Sun Life Assurance Company.

Sun Life’s policy stated that if Costello became disabled and could not perform the “material and substantial duties of her occupation” that she would be entitled to disability benefits for 24 months. At the end of 24 months, she would have to prove that she was “unable to perform the material and substantial duties of ‘any gainful occupation” in order to remain eligible for disability benefits.

Click here to continue reading Sun Life Ordered To Re-Evaluate Long-Term Disability Benefit Denial By Federal Judge

Late Application Filing Results In MetLife Denying A Physician's Long-Term Disability Claim

When Dr. Beatriz Martinez received a letter from MetLife denying her claim for long-term disability insurance, her only remaining option was to file a lawsuit. Unfortunately for her, the court upheld Met Life’s denial for one primary reason, she filed her claim for disability benefits four months too late. No arguments put forth by her attorneys could change that fact, and in the end, her appeal was denied, and she lost her lawsuit.

This issue arises far too frequently. Let’s look at Dr. Martinez’ story. There are important lessons for all of us.

Click here to continue reading Late Application Filing Results In MetLife Denying A Physician's Long-Term Disability Claim

Disability Benefits Ordered To Paid By Jefferson Pilot To A Clinical Director Suffering From Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue And Depression

Annette Engel was employed with Harborcreek Youth Services as a Clinical Director, where she performed duties such as providing leadership and vision, developing proposals, overseeing interviews and recruits of other clinicians, consultation and more. On September 5, 2007, Mrs. Engel applied for long term disability benefits under her employer’s plan with Jefferson Pilot (aka Lincoln National), claiming fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue, stress, and depression resulting from working long hours.

Click here to continue reading Disability Benefits Ordered To Paid By Jefferson Pilot To A Clinical Director Suffering From Fibromyalgia, Chronic Fatigue And Depression

Mississippi Court Orders Prudential To Pay Long-Term Disability Benefits To A Computer Consultant

Walter Pettway was employed with ADP (NASDAQ: ADP), as a principal consultant, beginning in 1994.  Mr. Pettway’s job required him to travel the United States helping large corporations with computer processes.  In the 1970’s, Mr. Pettway had undergone a cervical fusion at the C6-7 level and at the C5-6 level in 1999.  In the summer of 2002, Mr. Pettway suffered a fall which aggravated his condition, so that he experienced issues with his neck, lower back, left arm, right and left leg weakness and numbness in his fingers.  In October 2002, Mr. Pettway began treating with and orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Ragab.

Mr. Pettway underwent a cervical discectomy and fusion from C3 to C5 with an allograft and placement of anterior instrumentation on January 21, 2003.  Because of continued finger numbness and neck pain, Mr. Pettway underwent another surgical procedure to remove the hardware on June 24, 2003.  Continued pain led Mr.Pettway’s orthopedic surgeon to suggest his pain and numbness was a result of scarring from past surgeries.

 

On January 20, 2003, Mr. Pettway applied for long-term disability benefits with Prudential as outlined in the plan he was part of with his workplace.  He claimed disability for the recent cervical issues, pain and numbness as well as a history of diabetes and high blood pressure. Submitted with the disability claim was a statement of Dr. Ragab, indicating that the patient had been diagnosed with cervical spondylosis and herniated nucleus pulposus.  Prudential initially approved Pettaway’s claim for disability benefits.

 

Disability benefits were received until December 1, 2003 because Prudential stated that Mr. Pettway was no longer qualified to receive them.  At this point with the policy, Mr. Pettway could only be considered disabled if he were not able to perform the duties of any job as opposed to only the duties of his job.  Along with an appeal on November 25, 2003 Mr. Pettway submitted a statement from Dr. Ragab on December 5, 2003, stating that Mr. Pettway was, “unable to perform the duties of any gainful occupation which he is reasonably fitted by education, training and experience.”

 

A Prudential-initiated independent medical exam by Dr. Thomas Cullom, a neurological surgery specialist, was scheduled on January 7, 2004.  Dr. Cullom concluded that Pettway was unable to perform the duties of his own current occupation.  Prudential reinstated benefits on January 22, 2004.  Multiple attempts to perform surveillance on Mr. Pettway happened between February 2004 and November 2007.  At one point, Prudential had video of a man they thought was Mr. Pettway.  However, it was proven not to be and those videos were disregarded.  There was one video of Mr. Pettway driving to a car rental location, placing two bags in the car and driving for an hour.

 

Another independent medical examination was scheduled with Dr. Jo Lynn Polk, on November 16, 2007.  After examining Pettway, reviewing his medical records, and watching the surveillance video of Mr. Pettway, Dr. Polk concluded that the patient’s, “self-reported functionality is not consistent with the activities noted on the surveillance.”

 

Other claims by Dr. Polk include, "(1) although he claims his left hand is weak, there was no atrophy of his left hand muscles; (2) although he says he has numbness in his left hand, there was only a slight sensory deficit which would impart minimal impaired function of the left hand; (3) although he says he can sit for only 30 minutes at a time, he sat on the examining room table for one hour during my interview; and (4) although he says he needs assistance standing and wiping himself after bowel movements, during my evaluation he demonstrated independence with standing after sitting and had adequate right shoulder internal rotation to wipe himself after bowel elimination."

 

As far as standing without assistance, Dr. Polk repeated only what a nurse relayed to her – these observations were not made firsthand.

 

Prudential had an in-house physician, Dr. Day, review Dr. Polk’s report and he concluded, “I would agree with the conclusion Dr. Polk noted that the claimant has sustainable work capacity at least at a sedentary level. There were several inconsistencies in the physical examination by Dr. Polk.”

 

In another appeal, Mr. Pettway submitted letters from three physicians (Dr. Ragab, Dr. Cullom and Dr. Bouldin), which disagreed with Prudential’s findings.  Prudential denied benefits and stated in a letter sent June 11, 2008 that Mr. Pettway has the functional ability to perform duties of jobs other than his own, which he is well-trained and qualified for.

 

In the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Hattiesburg Division, it was found that Prudential completely ignored irrefutable evidence of Mr. Pettway’s condition by his treating physicians.  Instead they relied on Dr. Polk’s assessment, a physician who saw him for less than an hour.  The video evidence was disregarded, both because Prudential had been unsuccessful at surveying Mr. Pettway most of the time and had blundered in their attempts to do so and because nothing in the videos suggested that Mr. Pettway was able to perform the duties of any job with reasonably continuity.  Because of this, the court ordered Prudential to reinstate Mr. Pettway’s long term disability benefits.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability insurance attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

Conneticut Court Rules Against Prudential After They Fail To Recognize Pain Caused By Fibromyalgia As A Long Term Disability

In February of 2006, Mrs. Lanoue was a table games floor person for the Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority and had been since October of 1997. She was covered under the long-term disability plan issued and funded by Prudential Insurance Company of America (NYSE:PRU). In April of 2006, Mrs. Lanoue filed for long-term disability, claiming to have chronic pain, fatigue and fibromyalgia. Her claim included an employee statement and an attending physician’s statement (APS) from rheumatologist, Dr. Sandeep Varma.

Click here to continue reading Conneticut Court Rules Against Prudential After They Fail To Recognize Pain Caused By Fibromyalgia As A Long Term Disability

US Supreme Court Attempts To Clarify The Standard Of Review In Denial Of Long-term Disability Benefits

On June 19, 2008, the Supreme Court of the United States finally issued their opinion in the case of Wanda Glen v. Met Life. In a 6 to 3 decision announced Thursday, the US Supreme Court ruled that benefit denials by such companies must be examined with caution when circumstances suggest a high likelihood that financial considerations affected a benefits decision. While Ms. Glenn won her case and Met Life was ordered to pay long-term disability benefits, the Supreme Court did not make any significant findings that will change the way that Federal courts must interpret disability benefit denials.  The Supreme Court had an opportunity to modify the standard of review to "de novo" (complete review)  in all conflict of interest disability claim denials, however they did nothing to give employees a better chance of securing disability benefits that have been denied.

Click here to continue reading US Supreme Court Attempts To Clarify The Standard Of Review In Denial Of Long-term Disability Benefits

Federal Judge Reverses MetLife's Denial of Disability Benefits

Carolyn Kinser, an employee of Associates First Capital Corporation filed a lawsuit against Met Life for wrongful denial of disability benefits. Ms. Kinser was disabled from her occupation due to bipolar disorder and major depressive order. Ms. Kinser had been under continued care and treatment with the same psychiatrist for more than ten years.

Click here to continue reading Federal Judge Reverses MetLife's Denial of Disability Benefits

Diagnosis of Insured's Medical Condition After Termination of Employment Does Not Preclude Disability Claim

Daniel J. Rochow, the former president of Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., was insured under Life Insurance Co. of North America’s disability plan. The Sixth Circuit affirmed that a disability insurer’s denial of benefits to a former employee who was terminated because his symptoms prevented him from performing his duties was arbitrary and capricious, even though the employee’s diagnosis was not made until after he stopped working.

Click here to continue reading Diagnosis of Insured's Medical Condition After Termination of Employment Does Not Preclude Disability Claim

Court Upheld Standard's Decision to Deny Disability Benefits

Carol Shepherd, a fork-lift operator for Daramic, was insured under the company’s group disability plan with Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company. In 2004, Ms. Shepherd had an anxiety attack at work and Daramic suspended her and required that she participate in anger management before returning to work. During her suspension, Ms. Shepherd was receiving treatment at Owensboro Medical Health System Outpatient Counseling Center where she was diagnosed with major depression and anxiety disorder.

Click here to continue reading Court Upheld Standard's Decision to Deny Disability Benefits

Prudential's Motion to Dismiss Claimant's Disability Benefits is Denied

Jenny Eberle, an employee of Purdue University, was initially approved for long-term disability benefits by the Prudential Insurance Company of America. Shortly after her claim was approved, a new claims examiner and registered nurse reviewed Ms. Eberle’s medical records and decided to terminate her long term benefits in November 2004.

Click here to continue reading Prudential's Motion to Dismiss Claimant's Disability Benefits is Denied

MetLife Denial Reversed on Appeal: A Diagnosis of Radiculopathy is Exempt from 24 Month Limitation Period for Neuromusculoskeletal Disorders

Kelly Iley, a pharmacist for Kroger Co, was insured under the company’s group long-term disability policy with Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife). In June 2001, Ms. Iley was diagnosed with lumbar disc disease.

Ms. Iley stopped working in May 2001 and had a discetomy in July 2001 and a fusion surgery in May 2002. She continued to suffer from back pain and filed a total disability benefits claim in November 2001. MetLife initially approved Ms. Iley’s claim but terminated benefits in July 2004, noting the plan’s 24 month limitation period for neuromusculoskeletal and soft-tissue disorders. On appeal, Ms. Iley’s treating physicians submitted statements that she was totally disabled due to radiculopathies. MetLife upheld its denial of benefits and Ms. Iley filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, seeking reinstatement of benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

Upon reviewing the case, Judge Sean F. Cox found that MetLife ignored Ms. Iley’s treating doctor’s diagnosis of radiculopathy and wrongly denied long-term disability benefits under ERISA. Judge Cox found that the plan’s 24 month limitation period did not apply to Ms. Iley and ordered reinstatement of her benefits. The court also awarded Ms. Iley over $20,000 in attorney fees.

Kelly Iley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 2:05-cv-71237, E.D. Mich.; 2007 U.S. Dist.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

Hartford's Attempt to Deny Disability Benefits Based on Video Surveillance is Reversed on Appeal

Robin Plummer, a pharmacist for Kmart Corporation, was insured under the company’s group disability plan administered by Continental Insurance Company. In 2003, Hartford Life Insurance Company took over administration of the plan.

Ms. Plummer’s back problems began in 1998 and resulted in anterior and posterior fusion surgery. In 1999, Ms. Plummer began receiving long –term disability benefits. In 2004, Hartford had Dr. Klein examine Ms. Plummer who concluded that she could perform a sedentary job. Shortly after the evaluation, Hartford sent Dr. Klein video surveillance of Ms. Plummer which showed her driving for 30 minutes, shopping in a department store, and carrying her grandchild. After viewing the surveillance tapes, Dr. Klein issued an addendum to his report stating that Ms. Plummer could perform light-duty work and lift up to 25 pounds. Based on Dr. Klein’s report, Hartford terminated Ms. Plummer’s benefits. Ms. Plummer filed suit seeking benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

U.S. Judge Thomas M. Rose of the Southern District of Ohio found that Hartford’s termination of benefits to a claimant with chronic back pain was unreasonable. Judge Rose held that the record supports that Ms. Plummer was unable to return to her job as a pharmacist. The judge said that Dr. Klein’s independent medical exam was flawed since he “initially examined Plummer and determined that she was in the sedentary job classification and then changed his opinion based totally upon videos which included observance of Plummer for a total of approximately 13 minutes.” Furthermore, Judge Rose noted that despite the activities in the video surveillance, Hartford’s doctor could not determine if Ms. Plummer “was experiencing pain”. Summary judgment was granted to Ms. Plummer finding that she was entitled to disability benefits under her plan.

Robin Plummer v. The Hartford Life Insurance Co., No. 3:06cv00094, S.D. Ohio; 2007 U.S. Dist.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

Unum's Denial of Pediatric Nurse is Overturned on Appeal

Nancy Mikrut, a pediatric nurse practitioner for Danbury Health Systems, was insured under the company’s group disability plan administered by Unum Life Insurance Company of America. In 1999, Ms. Mikrut was injured in an automobile accident and was unable to return to work due to severe back pain. In January 2000, Ms. Mikrut was diagnosed with spinal stenosis and filed for long-term disability benefits. After an intradiscal electrothermal therapy, Ms. Mikrut has a second surgery in March 2001.

After 24 months of benefits, Unum re-evaluated Ms. Mikrut’s claim. Without meeting her, a Unum medical consultant found Ms. Mikrut capable of full-time sedentary work. In August 2002, Ms. Mikrut’s treating physician told Unum that she was disabled from any occupation in which she had to bend, lift, pull, sit, or stand for periods of time. Unum terminated Ms. Mikrut’s benefits and she filed suit, seeking benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

U.S. Judge Stefan R. Underhill of the District of Connecticut found that Unum failed to account for subjective complaints of pain and the treating physician’s opinions before terminating Ms. Mikrut’s benefits. The judge ruled that Unum did not adequately consider an award of benefits by the Social Security Administration. Judge Underhill held that Ms. Mikrut is eligible for continued long-term disability benefits under the plan since she is unable to perform the duties of any gainful occupation. While Unum is not required to credit treating physician’s opinion over other evidence, Judge Underhill stated that Unum cannot “arbitrarily refuse to credit a claimant’s reliable evidence, including the opinions of treating physicians.”

Nancy P. Mikrut v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, No. 3:03cv1714, D. Conn.; 2006 U.S. Dist.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

Hartford Ordered to Re-Evaluate Denial of Disability Benefits

James Linnen, a powerhouse operator for Goodyear, Tire and Rubber Company, was insured under his company’s group disability plan issued by Continental Casualty Company. Mr. Linnen began collecting long-term disability benefits for narcolepsy and cataplexy in 2001. In 2004, Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company purchased Continental and reviewed Mr. Linnen’s disability status. After the treating physician admitted Mr. Linnen was capable of sedentary work, Hartford terminated Mr. Linnen’s benefits in April 2005. Hartford found alternate occupations Mr. Linnen could perform such as cage boss and order parts clerk. Hartford upheld its decision in appeal and Mr. Linnen sued, seeking benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. (ERISA)

Judge David S. Dowd Jr. of the Northern District of Ohio reviewed Hartford’s decision to terminate benefits and ruled that Hartford used the wrong standard in assessing if Mr. Linnen was entitled to long-term benefits. The policy states the claimant must be unable to “engage in any substantially gainful occupation for which you are, or may reasonably become, qualified by your education, training or experience”. Judge Dowd ruled the term “substantially” alters the definition and Hartford should have assessed whether Mr. Linnen was able to obtain “substantial gainful employment” before terminating benefits. However, if employment is available that pays nearly the same wages and benefits, benefits could possibly be terminated.

James Linnen v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Co., No. 05:06CV0141, N.D. Ohio; 2006 U.S. Dist.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

MetLife Ordered to Pay Disability Benefits Beyond 24 Months For a Claimant with Both Mental and Physical Disabilities

Mr. Mark J. Schwartz, an accountant, was insured under his employer’s group disability plan, sponsored by Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (MetLife), which limits disability benefits for mental illness to 24 months, but to age 65 for a physical disability.

Click here to continue reading MetLife Ordered to Pay Disability Benefits Beyond 24 Months For a Claimant with Both Mental and Physical Disabilities

U.S. Judge Orders Broadspire to Reinstate a Former Bank Employee's Disability Benefits

Sandra Mikolajczyk, an employee of ABN AMBRO North America Inc., was awarded disability benefits for her depression, fatigue, chronic C6 radiculopathy, carpel tunnel syndrome, cholloid brain cyst, multivalve prolapse, cervical disc surgery, anterior cervical neural decompression and other disorders. Ms. Mikolajczyk was insured by her company’s group disability policy with Broadspire Services, Inc.

Click here to continue reading U.S. Judge Orders Broadspire to Reinstate a Former Bank Employee's Disability Benefits

US District Judge Rules for Disability Claimant

June 23, 2006, U.S. District Judge Joe B. McDade of the Central District of Illinois Ruled in favor of Susan Svejda, an employee of Mercantile Bancorp. Ms. Svedja was employed with Mercantile until 2002. After several visits to physicians and her neurologist, Dr. Douglas Sullivant, M.D., Ms. Svedja was diagnosed with MS, Chronic imbalance, depression and bowel problems including IBS (Irritable Bowel Syndrome) which require her to frequently rush to the bathroom, often times not making it due to other infirmities. As a result of these conditions, Ms. Svedja stopped working and applied for long-term disability benefits from Mercantile’s insurance contract with Continental. 

Click here to continue reading US District Judge Rules for Disability Claimant

California Federal Court Rejects Prudential's Attempt to Limit Claim

Rosa Wood had carpel tunnel syndrome and left work in 1999 because of it. After receiving short term disability benefits and undergoing back surgery, Ms. Wood applied for long term benefits. Initially, Ms. Wood’s claim for benefits was denied however her plan eventually agreed to pay benefits for the first phase of long term disability. Under the first phase, claimants are entitled to benefits for seven to twenty-nine months based on their ability to perform any substantial gainful work. Prudential then denied long-term disability benefits to Ms. Wood during the second phase which would continue benefits beyond the twenty-nine months. After two internal appeals, Ms. Wood sued Prudential in Federal Court.

Click here to continue reading California Federal Court Rejects Prudential's Attempt to Limit Claim

Federal Court Rules that Degenerative Arthritis of Claimant's Knee was a "Sickness" and Not Caused by an "Injury"

Lawrence Levy, M.D., insured under two disability policies with Minnesota Life Insurance Co., became disabled in March 1996 and has been receiving total disability benefits due to osteoarthritis in his right knee. Dr. Levy claims his disability is an “injury” rather than a “sickness” because the osteoarthritis is due to a basketball injury. The policy provides disability benefits to the age of 65 if the disability is caused by “sickness”, disability benefits will be paid for life is the disability is caused by an “injury”.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Sidney I. Schnekier said the best interpretation of the policy is the term “immediate cause”. Under the immediate cause standard, Dr. Levy’s disability is due to sickness. The Judge stated the knee pain is due to degenerative arthritis and should characterize as a “sickness” under the long-term disability policy. Dr. Levy’s benefits will terminate at age 65.

Lawrence B. Levy, M.D. v. Minnesota Life Insurance Co., No. 03-C-5141, N.D. Ill.; 2006 U.S. Dist.

About the author: Gregory Michael Dell is an attorney and managing partner of the disability income division of Attorneys Dell & Schaefer. Mr. Dell and his team of disability attorneys have assisted thousands of long-term disability claimants with their claims against every major disability insurance company. Attorney Gregory Dell is a nationally recognized disability attorney and the author of a long-term disability insurance law book published by Thomson Reuters, which is a legal reference for attorneys and judges. For a free consultation, please call 800-828-7583 or use our contact page.

MetLife's Attempts to Stop Paying Total Disability Benefits After Paying Claimant for 10 Years is Denied

Robert Clarke, a market sales manager for Allstate Insurance Company, stopped working in 1992 due to lumbar spinal stenosis, claiming he was unable to sit, stand, or walk for more than 10 minutes. Mr. Clarke was insured under his company’s group disability plan administered by Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. and was paid total disability benefits as of 1992. After several back fusion surgeries in 1990, 1992, and 1994, MetLife approved Mr. Clarke’s initial claim for benefits. In 2002, after paying total disability benefits for more than 10 years, MetLife decided to terminate Mr. Clarke’s disability benefits and claim that Mr. Clarke could perform sedentary work.

Click here to continue reading MetLife's Attempts to Stop Paying Total Disability Benefits After Paying Claimant for 10 Years is Denied