North Carolina disability attorney is unsuccessful in obtaining disability insurance benefits for former TYCO employee
The Circuit Court of Appeals recently reviewed an unusual short term disability insurance denial by applying North Carolina law. The short-term disability coverage offered by TYCO is not governed by ERISA as the disability plan is self-funded. Unlike the majority of disability plans that are funded by disability insurance companies, a self-funded plan is generally not governed by ERISA. In this case, the North Carolina Disability Attorney representing the claimant attempted to argue that ERISA laws should apply to a policy that is not governed by ERISA.
I consider this case to be strange, because I have rarely ever seen a disability insurance case where the claimant’s attorney wanted ERISA to apply to the case. The bottom line with this case is that the short term disability policy offered by TYCO was written with language that gave TYCO the ability to handle short term disability claims in whatever manner they desired. This case is also another example of the old saying that “you get what you pay for”. This benefit offered by TYCO was either free to employees or the employees could pay a small amount each month. The pertinent language from the Circuit Court of Appeals opinion is provided below:
Under North Carolina law, Tyco’s short-term disability policy is a unilateral contract in which Tyco offered its employees an opportunity to apply for and to receive short-term disability benefits. See White v. Hugh Chatham Mem’l Hosp., Inc., 387 S.E.2d 80, 81 (N.C. Ct. App. 1990); Hamilton v. Memorex Telex Corp., 454 S.E.2d 278, 282-83 (N.C. Ct. App. 1995). A Tyco employee accepts that offer by entering or maintaining employment. See White, 387 S.E.2d at 81.
North Carolina law provides that a contract is construed as a whole, and that individual clauses are construed in their context. Sec. Nat’l Bank v. Educators Mut. Life Ins. Co., 143 S.E.2d 270, 275 (N.C. 1965). If a contract provides a party “discretionary power affecting the rights of others,” then that party must exercise its discretionary power “in a reasonable manner based upon good faith and fair play.” Mezzanotte v. Freeland, 200 S.E.2d 410, 414 (N.C. Ct. App. 1973). A contract confers “discretionary power” when the contract language provides one party with the right to exercise its sole judgment. See Midulla v. Howard A. Cain Co., 515 S.E.2d 244, 246 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999).
We consider the plain language of the short-term disability contract. See Holshouser v. Shaner Hotel Group Props. Ltd. P’ship, 518 S.E.2d 17, 18 (N.C. Ct. App. 1999). The stated purpose of Tyco’s short-term disability policy is to “establish the procedure to determine an employee’s eligibility to receive Short-Term and Long-Term Disability Benefits for non-occupational illness/injury.” The policy defines a “Short Term Disability” as “a condition that renders an employee incapable of performing the required duties of his/her occupation… due to non-occupational injury or illness.” The policy states that a short-term disability benefit “may” be available to an employee who has a short-term disability.
The policy includes a section entitled “Short-Term Disability Procedure.” In that section, the policy explains that an employee must notify his supervisor when he is unable to work due to an illness or injury. The policy further details the responsibilities of the supervisor in contacting the short-term disability “vendor.” According to the policy, the vendor is responsible for contacting the employee and the employee’s medical provider to verify the employee’s medical information.
The procedure section of the policy also explains the various requirements imposed after the approval or denial of an employee’s disability claim. For example, if a claim is approved, the employee must provide medical updates to the vendor on a regular basis. However, if the disability claim is denied, the employee must return to work immediately or appeal the denial of the claim within fourteen days.
A “disclaimer” is provided at the end of the policy. The disclaimer states that “[t]he Vice President of Human Resources, or designee, whose decision shall be final, shall make any interpretation(s) of, or exception(s) to [the] policy.”
The plain language of Tyco’s policy demonstrates that the policy does not guarantee that an employee will receive short-term disability benefits if the employee meets the policy’s requirements for establishment of a short-term disability. Instead, the policy merely provides that short-term disability benefits “may” be available to an employee who has a short-term disability. This language also must be construed in light of other policy provisions, including the disclaimer and the statement that a claim may be “approved” or “denied.” See Sec. Nat’l Bank, 143 S.E.2d at 275.
These provisions, when viewed together, provide employees alleging a disability with the right to file a claim for benefits, and with an established claims procedure that allows Tyco the right to exercise its judgment when reviewing claims made under the policy. This policy language provides Tyco with “discretionary power” to approve or deny claims. See Mezzanotte, 200 S.E.2d at 414. An employee’s right to short-term disability benefits therefore is contingent upon Tyco’s exercise of its discretionary power.
We are not persuaded by Leone’s argument that Tyco lacks discretionary power to approve or deny benefit claims because such power is not stated expressly in the policy. In advancing this argument, Leone exclusively relies on court decisions involving claims brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). See Gallagher v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 305 F.3d 264, 268-69 (4th Cir. 2002); Herzberger v. Standard Ins. Co., 205 F.3d 327, 331-32 (7th Cir. 2000). These ERISA cases, which reflect the fiduciary relationship of an employer to its employees in certain contexts not applicable here, are not relevant to our breach of contract analysis. See Griggs v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., 237 F.3d 371, 379-80 (4th Cir. 2001) (discussing the responsibilities of a fiduciary under ERISA). As explained above, we reach our conclusion concerning Tyco’s contractual authority upon consideration of the plain language of the entire policy.
We also observe that, under North Carolina contract law, Tyco was required to exercise its discretionary power “in a reasonable manner based upon good faith and fair play.” Mezzanotte, 200 S.E.2d at 414. The evidence in the record shows that Tyco acted reasonably in reviewing Leone’s second claim for short-term disability benefits. Tyco referred Leone’s claim to Dr. Bates for multiple reviews, considered Leone’s appeal and additional documentation, and relied on Dr. Bates’ various recommendations to deny Leone’s claim. Additionally, Leone has not presented any evidence that Tyco failed to exercise its discretionary power in a reasonable manner. Therefore, we hold that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment to Tyco on Leone’s breach of contract claim.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Disability Benefit Denial Options
Submit a Strong Appeal Package
We work with you, your doctors, and other experts to submit a very strong appeal.
Sue Your Disability Insurance Company
We have filed thousands of disability denial lawsuits in federal Courts nationwide.
Protect Your Benefits
Get Your Disability Application Approved
We help claimants throughout the entire application process.
Prevent a Disability Benefit Denial
We manage every aspect of your disability claim following claim approval.
Negotiate a Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Disability Company Reviews
(642)
Showing 8 of 642 Reviews
Sedgwick
AT&T Was Great and Sedgwick Horrible
My Physician recommended that I take some time from a toxic environment after several deaths in my family coupled with AT&T trying to run tenured employees out of the door... read more >
New York Life
Keeps claiming they will not approve claim for pre existing conditions but my illness is not preexisting
I have been appealing a claim for LTD for 8 months! New York Life keeps claiming they will not approve claim for pre existing conditions but my illness is not preexisting ... read more >
Reliance Standard
Staff Lie
I had my disability cut off the day I was scheduled to find out whether I should have surgery. The claims examiner was aware that I had an appointment on that date and sai... read more >
Reply
Hartford
Former Hartford employee has had life insurance and accidental death policy's revoked for one late premium payment
Dislike how they are constantly interrupting the lives of their disabled EE's whom are entitled to benefit which they paid into out of there pay check every pay period onl... read more >
Reply
Lincoln Financial
Never received benefits my entire leave - or help with them
I used my short term disability insurance for maternity leave and started the process beforehand knowing when I would be out (scheduled induction.) It took a little over a... read more >
Sun Life
Unscrupulous Tactics
Sunlife uses unscrupulous tactics in order to prevent payment of claims. They wait until it is close to the 30 day mark and then they ask for another form of information o... read more >
Sedgwick
Lame
My experience with Sedgwick and personell is as follows: Unhelpful, unprofessional and an overall unpleasant experience.
Unum
Low payments
I was injured at work. I did house keeping in a hospital. I tore just about everything imaginable in my knee. I was let go from my job, because I was no longer able to do ... read more >
Answered Questions by Our Lawyers
(0)
Helpful Videos
(888)
Showing 12 of 888 Videos
Disability Benefit Tips
(331)
Showing 8 of 331 Benefit Tips
Why Must Your Disability Insurance Lawyer Understand Your Disabling Condition?
When it comes to securing your long term disability benefits, it's vitally important that you... Read More >
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #5 – Your Medical Evidence is Weak
If you're seeking long term disability benefits from an insurance company, you may be concern... Read More >
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #4 - Your Doctor Is Misled By the Disability Company
When you're seeking disability benefits under a long term disability policy, your medical rec... Read More >
Disability Benefit Denial Reason #3 - Video & Social Media Surveillance
One thing many long term disability claimants don't know about (or expect) from the claims re... Read More >
How Do You Fight a Long-Term Disability Denial?
Getting a denial letter from your disability insurance company is one of the ultimate insults... Read More >
Disability Denial Reason #2 - Change of Disability Definition & Vocational Review
One of the top reasons for terminating a claimant's long term disability benefits involves th... Read More >
Disability Denial Reason #1 – Paper Review & IME
At Dell Disability Lawyers, we've seen insurance companies give countless reasons to deny lon... Read More >
How to Apply for Reliance Standard Disability Benefits & Top 5 Reasons for a Claim Denial
At Dell & Schaefer we’ve handled hundreds of long term disability insurance claims against Reliance Standard, and have learned a few thi... Read More >
Dell Disability Cases
(375)
Showing 8 of 375 Dell Disability Cases
Seven Surgeries and The Standard Still Denies Long Term Disability Benefits
Our client was employed with the State of Oregon as a Technical Support Representative. She ... Read More >
Sun Life Wrongfully Denies Disability After Paying For 23 Months
We represent a 57 year-old claimant who’s occupation was selling commercial vehicles for ma... Read More >
Nurse Denied Long-term Disability Benefits by Lincoln After the Definition of Disability Changed
Our client, a registered nurse for Dignity Health, found herself in a difficult situation aft... Read More >
Lincoln Reverses Decision to Terminate LTD Benefits of Corporate Attorney after Dell Disability Lawyers Appeals the Decision
The claimant is an 64 year old former Corporate Attorney and at a prominent Florida business ... Read More >
Transportation Manager with Brain Injury Wins Unum Disability Benefit Appeal
Unum unjustly terminated our client’s long term disability claim after it had approved and... Read More >
Prudential reverses decision to terminate LTD benefits of MRI Tech with Primary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis and degenerative Disc Disease
The claimant is a 58-year-old former MRI Technologist for Fairview Health Services who has lo... Read More >
Engineer With Depression Wins Prudential LTD Appeal
The claimant is a former Senior Technology Services Engineer for Accolade, Inc. who was force... Read More >
New York Life Approves Disability Benefits for School Teacher With Multiple Sclerosis
Our client, a former elementary school teacher suffering from Multiple Sclerosis, contacted our office after New York Life terminated her clai... Read More >
Disability Lawsuit Stories
(765)
Reviews from Our Clients
