Recently, a United States law firm settled a client’s lawsuit against a life insurance company who decided to terminate the clients long-term disability benefits. The lawsuit claimed that the insurance company prematurely terminated the clients disability benefits explained a Los Angeles ERISA life insurance attorney. The client’s residence was located in New Jersey but the life insurance company was located in the downtown section of Indianapolis. The law firm was able to represent the client in Indiana since the life insurance company was incorporated under Indiana law. The case was filed in a federal district court that was under the umbrella of the Southern District of Indiana.
The client was an accounts manager for an insurance broker. She was an employee for the broker since 2008. In December 2012, she became disabled and was unable to work any more because of severe cervical stenosis and a lumbar radiculopathy. These two conditions resulted in ongoing fecal incontinence along with chronic pain. Her doctors were able to provide her with medical proof that she would not be able to continue working because of these medical impairments.
The disability insurance policy from her employer stated that she would be compensated if she was ever unable to continue her job due to illness or injury. The insurance company paid the clients short-term disability benefits and long-term disability benefits. After 24 months, the insurance company claimed that the disability was caused by a mental impairment and therefore the disability insurance policy would only cover the benefits for a 24 month period.
There was fine print in the insurance policy that stated that if a disabling condition was considered to be a mental impairment then the benefits would only last 24 months. However, the doctors records and reports established that the client was suffering from what they originally stated, chronic lumbar and cervical back issues.
After appealing the decision with the insurance company unsuccessfully the law firm filed a lawsuit against the insurance company. The insurance company provided various submissions on why this woman could have actually returned to work. The judge in the case decided to get the two parties together so as to resolve the case prior to further litigation. This resulted in a settlement that was mutually satisfying to all parties. At this point, the client dismissed her lawsuit against the insurance company.
If anything like this ever occurs to you it is important to contact a reputable and experienced law firm for a free consultation.