Court misses the mark on disability
A decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York reveals a court’s flawed analysis of disability.
Author: Mark Debofsky
Ruling gives benefits, but not lawyer fees
Hopkins v. Prudential Insur.Co. of America, 2006 WL 1343432 (N.D. Ill., May 12). Plaintiff, an employee of Bank One Corporation, challenged his disability insurer’s invocation of a preexisting condition exclusion to deny him long-term disability benefits. Hopkins was first employed by Bank One in 1999, and elected long-term disability insurance coverage when he commenced employment. […]
Court Tries to End Discretion Debate
In 1989, the Supreme Court issued Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101 (1989), which permitted the inclusion of language in employee benefit plans (including insurance policies) that would trigger a deferential standard of court review in ERISA cases.
Remand didn’t help where Plan was at fault
The plaintiff, a loan originator, originally became disabled in 1993 due to an ankle injury. Although her ankle improved, she was also involved in a serious car accident, and her benefits were continued until 1996 when Hartford cut off the benefit payments even though she continued to suffer from pain, fatigue, problems with memory and […]
Decision Begins to Explain Problems With ERISA Litigation
Dennis Paese, a long-time employee and director of labor relations for Sequa Corporation, was severely injured in a car accident. Paese v. Hartford Life and Accident Insur. Co., 2006 U.S.App.LEXIS 13007 (2d U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals May 24,2006).