• Northwestern Mutual Long Term Disability Claim TipsNorthwestern Mutual Long Term Disability Claim Tips
  • Northwestern Mutual Disability Denial Lawyer HelpNorthwestern Mutual Disability Denial Lawyer Help
  • Northwestern Mutual Insurance Disability ClaimsNorthwestern Mutual Insurance Disability Claims
  • Beware of Hired Gun Doctors in Disability Insurance Claims (Ep. 23)Beware of Hired Gun Doctors in Disability Insurance Claims (Ep. 23)

9th Circuit Clarifies The Definition Of “Sedentary Work”

In Armani v. Northwest Mutual, plaintiff Avery Armani, a Controller for an insurance agency, injured his back while lifting a heavy back-up power supply at work. As an employee of the insurance agency, he was covered by a Group Long-Term Disability Insurance policy issued by Northwest Mutual (NWM).

Benefit Provisions

Under the terms of the LTD Policy, the definition of disability changed after benefits were paid for 24 months. For the first 24 months, a claimant must be “unable to perform with reasonable continuity the material duties of his Own Occupation.” After 24 months of disability, the claimant must be “unable to perform with reasonable continuity the material duties of Any Gainful Occupation for which he is reasonably fitted by education, training, and experience”.

Initial Claim Approval and Subsequent Denial

Armani submitted his claim for benefits in July 2011. He was limited to sitting for four hours, standing for two hours, and walking for two hours during an eight-hour workday. NWM’s vocational case manager confirmed that Armani’s occupation was classified as sedentary, and Armani’s disability claim was approved under the “own occupation” definition test effective July 18, 2011.

Between September 2011 and January 2012, Armani continued to visit chiropractors, pain specialists, and physicians, all of whom confirmed that Armani’s disability precluded him from working. Based solely on these medical records, however, NWM’s reviewing physician determined that Armani was capable of working in a sedentary position. In July 2013 NWM informed Armani that his LTD claim was being closed because “his records did not support a disability under the ‘own occupation’ or ‘any occupation” test.’

Armani’s Appeal of the Denial of Continued Benefits

After NWM denied his claim for continuing benefits, Armani appealed the decision and requested a review by a second doctor. NWM submitted the file to a second doctor who concluded that Armani was not precluded from sedentary work and that “[i]t would be reasonable that [Armani] would have the ability to reposition from sitting to standing occasionally as needed.” NWM upheld the denial. Having exhausted his administrative remedies, Armani filed this ERISA lawsuit.

The District Court’s Case

In the District Court Armani argued that he was “unable to perform any occupation classified as ‘sedentary,’ because, by definition, ‘sedentary’ requires an ability to sit for six hours.” The court held that NWM was not bound by this definition of “sedentary” work on the basis that it was drawn from the Social Security context. Citing “the vast differences in both form and function between Social Security law and ERISA law,” the district court concluded, without further discussion or analysis, that “the federal criteria for Social Security claims are not transferable to ERISA cases.” The 9th Circuit, however, determined this conclusion was erroneous.

The 9th Circuit’s Holding

The 9th Circuit found that the administrative record available to the district court plainly showed that, between July 25, 2011, and April 15, 2013, every physician and chiropractor who treated Armani determined that he could not sit for more than four hours a day.

The 9th Circuit concluded that an employee who cannot sit for more than four hours in an eight-hour workday cannot perform work classified as “sedentary.” The Court further noted that “sedentary work” generally requires the ability to sit for at least six hours. Thus the logical conclusion is that an employee who is unable to sit for more than half of the workday cannot consistently perform an occupation that requires sitting for “most of the time.” Based on these findings, the Court held that an employee who cannot sit for more than four hours in an eight-hour workday cannot perform “sedentary” work that requires “sitting most of the time.”

This case was not handled by our office, but it may provide claimants guidance in their pursuit of compensation under the accidental dismemberment clause of an insurance policy. If you need assistance with a similar matter please contact any of our lawyers for a free consultation.

DISABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY INFORMATION
Videos, Questions, Resolved Cases, Lawsuit Summaries & Company Reviews

disability insurance companies complaints

Leave a comment or ask us a question

FAQ

Do you help Northwestern Mutual claimants nationwide?

We represent Northwestern Mutual clients nationwide and we encourage you to contact us for a FREE immediate phone consultation with one of our experienced disability insurance attorneys.

Can you help with a Northwestern Mutual disability insurance policy?

Our disability insurance lawyers help policy holders seeking short or long term disability insurance benefits from Northwestern Mutual. We have helped thousands of disability insurance claimants nationwide with monthly disability benefits. With more than 40 years of disability insurance experience we have helped individuals in almost every occupation and we are familiar with the disability income policies offered by Northwestern Mutual.

How do you help Northwestern Mutual claimants?

Our lawyers help individuals that have either purchased a Northwestern Mutual long term disability insurance policy from an insurance company or obtained short or long term disability insurance coverage as a benefit from their employer.

Our experienced lawyers can assist with Northwestern Mutual:

  • ERISA and Non-ERISA Appeals of Disability Benefit Denials
  • ERISA and Non-ERISA Disability Benefit Lawsuits
  • Applying For Short or Long Term Disability Benefits
  • Daily Handling & Management of Your Disability Claim
  • Disability Insurance Lump-Sum Buyout or Settlement Negotiations

Do you work in my state?

Yes. We are a national disability insurance law firm that is available to represent you regardless of where you live in the United States. We have partner lawyers in every state and we have filed lawsuits in most federal courts nationwide. Our disability lawyers represent disability claimants at all stages of a claim for disability insurance benefits. There is nothing that our lawyers have not seen in the disability insurance world.

What are your fees?

Since we represent disability insurance claimants at different stages of a disability insurance claim we offer a variety of different fee options. We understand that claimants living on disability insurance benefits have a limited source of income; therefore we always try to work with the claimant to make our attorney fees as affordable as possible.

The three available fee options are a contingency fee agreement (no attorney fee or cost unless we make a recovery), hourly fee or fixed flat rate.

In every case we provide each client with a written fee agreement detailing the terms and conditions. We always offer a free initial phone consultation and we appreciate the opportunity to work with you in obtaining payment of your disability insurance benefits.

Do I have to come to your office to work with your law firm?

No. For purposes of efficiency and to reduce expenses for our clients we have found that 99% of our clients prefer to communicate via telephone, e-mail, fax, GoToMeeting.com sessions, or Skype. If you prefer an initial in-person meeting please let us know. A disability company will never require you to come to their office and similarly we are set up so that we handle your entire claim without the need for you to come to our office.

How can I contact you?

When you call us during normal business hours you will immediately speak with a disability attorney. We can be reached at 800-682-8331 or by email. Lawyer and staff must return all client calls same day. Client emails are usually replied to within the same business day and seem to be the preferred and most efficient method of communication for most clients.

Reviews   *****

Michael C.

Working with Alex was a pleasure, before coming to Dell & Schaefer I had been thru 3 different firms before. The other firms never returned calls and did not keep me informed. When I finally found Dell & Schaefer namely Alex he took on my case with a week to answer an appeal, at first he was hesitive but took on my case and always kept me informed and up to date of how we were progressing. After some time we actually finally came to a settlement which as it seemed was never in sight before.

Read 424 reviews

Speak With An Attorney Now

Request a free legal consultation: Call 800-682-8331 or Email Us