Court Finds Irregularities in Procter & Gamble Long Term Disability Benefit Denial
In ERISA cases filed in a district court asking for judicial review of a plan administrator’s denial of benefits, the court is generally limited to considering only the administrative record that was before the plan administrator. The case of Robert Stallings v. The Proctor & Gamble Disability, Committee, et al., is an example of how plaintiffs with cases filed in a District Court that is under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit may obtain discovery of evidence outside the administrative record.
Key Take-Aways from the Case:
- Discovery may be granted if the plaintiff can show good cause for obtaining evidence that is outside the administrative record.
- Good cause is shown when there is a conflict of interest since the same entity determines benefits eligibility and pays those benefits out of its own pocket.
- Good cause is shown when the plaintiff shows an irregularity in that the plan administrator acted dishonestly, either from an improper motive or in a failure to use sound judgment when reaching the decision to deny benefits.
Summary of the Facts
The case began in 2013 when Defendants (Proctor & Gamble) agreed that Plaintiff was “totally disabled” due to his diagnoses of depressive disorder, chronic back pain, and chronic neck pain and awarded him benefits. In 2016, Defendants reviewed the Plaintiff’s medical records and again found him to be totally disabled.
On July 24, 2019, Defendants changed their minds and notified Plaintiff by letter that they no longer found him to be totally disabled, only partially disabled. Therefore, he no longer qualified for Plan disability benefits.
Plaintiff filed an administrative appeal, which was denied. He then filed this ERISA lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, Southeastern Division.
In his lawsuit, Plaintiff alleged that Defendants: 1) wrongfully denied him benefits, and 2) breached their fiduciary duty to him. These allegations were based on the two reasons Defendant gave Plaintiff for the denial of benefits:
1) Lack of “objective” medical evidence to support his claim.
2) Plaintiff failed to have a functional capacity evaluation (FCE).
After filing his lawsuit, Plaintiff made a motion for discovery. Discovery is rarely allowed in an ERISA lawsuit for wrongful denial of benefits. Generally, the Court is limited to its review based only on the administrative record that was before the Plan Administrator when the decision was made to deny benefits.
In this case, the District Court granted Plaintiff’s discovery motion for two reasons:
1) Defendants’ denial of benefits was based on procedural irregularities.
2) Defendants had a clear conflict of interest.
In granting the Plaintiff’s discovery motion, the Court held that “limited discovery is needed to ascertain the potential extent of any procedural irregularities and/or a conflict of interest because without such discovery, the ‘administrative record [is] [in]sufficient to permit a fair evaluation of the decision.’”
What is the Standard for Allowing Discovery in ERISA Lawsuits?
Generally, discovery is not allowed in judicial review of an ERISA lawsuit. The Court is limited to the evidence that was before the administrator and does not allow for discovery outside the administrative record.
The Court may allow discovery if the plaintiff demonstrates good cause. Examples of good cause include:
- The administrative record is insufficient to establish a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest exists if the same entity determines eligibility for benefits and then is responsible for paying those benefits out of its own pocket.
- The administrative record is insufficient to show a procedural error. Examples of this include where the plan administrator acted “dishonestly, from improper motive, or failed to use sound judgment in reaching its decision.”
If plaintiffs can demonstrate good cause, their discovery motion will be granted.
Did the Plan Administrator Have a Conflict of Interest?
Defendants conceded they had a conflict of interest since they were both the insurer who paid Plaintiff benefits and the Plan Administrator who determined whether Plaintiff qualified for benefits. But Defendants then argued that they had “taken steps to ensure any conflict of interest does not impact the benefit determination process.”
The Court found that this mere statement was not enough. There was nothing in the record that confirmed that policy was followed in Plaintiff’s case.
The Court granted Plaintiff’s discovery request, finding that “Plaintiff should be allowed to conduct limited discovery to determine whether such policies, procedures, and practices do actually exist and, if so, to what extent, if any, they interfered with the fair review of Plaintiff’s claim for benefits.”
Were There Procedural Irregularities in the Plan Administrator’s Review of Plaintiff’s Claim?
Legal precedent allows for discovery when warranted in ERISA cases “where the plan administrator, in the exercise of its power, acted dishonestly, from improper motive, or failed to use sound judgment in the reaching of its decision.” The Court noted that the existing administrative record showed that:
- Defendants may have disregarded favorable medical records and evidence regarding Plaintiff’s disabled status and relied only on reports that supported the denial of benefits.
- Defendants’ decision to deny benefits in July 2019 was inconsistent with its decision to approve benefits in 2013 and 2016. This appeared to be an unlawful application of the Plan provisions.
- Defendants canceled the FCE while Plaintiff was waiting for cardiology clearance for the exam. This may have been unreasonable under ERISA law.
- Defendants failed to explain why alternate FCE providers were disallowed.
The Court also granted the motion for discovery on this issue, finding that “the existing evidence raises questions as to whether the Committee used ‘sound judgment’ in their determination.”
This case was not handled by our office, but it may provide helpful information to claimants as they pursue compensation under their employer’s disability benefits policy. If you need assistance with your claim, no matter what stage you are at with it, contact our disability lawyers at Dell Disability Lawyers for a free consultation.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Get Your Disability Application Approved
Prevent a Disability Benefit Denial
Negotiate a Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Attorney Alexander Palamara of Dell Disability Lawyers gets LTD Benefits Reinstated for former Walmart Manager who is now found disabled from Any Occupation
NFL Disability Review Board Ignores Evidence of Disability and Appeal Court Reverses Lower Court Decision
California Federal Judge Orders Standard Insurance Company to Pay Disability Benefits to Teacher with Lyme Disease
Reviews from Our Clients
Very satisfied with the work of this team. Took well care of my case and took all the necessary time to be responsive and attentive when I had questions. Guided me through recovery and returning to normalcy. All thanks to Jason & Tabitha, thank you!
I’m extremely satisfied with the experience I have had with this firm from day one. The lawyer who has handled my case, Alex, is very efficient and attentive to all my questions and concerns. They are always aware of how my case has gone and they care about my health. I feel optimistic with them because they are very attentive during the process of my claim. I would not hesitate to recommend families and friends if in any situation they need their services. Kathleen as well has been very well and assisted me with this case. I highly appreciate everything they have done for me.
It’s unfortunate when disability insurance companies come after older disabled policyholders just to help their bottom line. It can be a living nightmare the damage they can do to a family. Dell Disability Lawyers are polite, understanding and knowledgeable. They call you back and answer any question you have no matter how unimportant it can be. The amount of stress they took off of myself and family was incalculable. I recommend them highly to take care of any disability case whether it be filing for benefits or reversing a claim decision. They are outstanding.
I could not have been happier or more appreciative of the hard work they performed on my behalf. I was well briefed on my case and it was closed in a timely manner with a financially successful resolution.
Mr. Symonds and Sonia as well as everyone else we have worked with throughout this process have been very helpful, professional and caring to our situation. We are very thankful to have this great team on our side.
Without them my LTD company was dropping my plan with me still suffering from my accident, even with doctor’s statements I’m still disabled. The LTD company didn’t want to advance my policy to the next stage of years of pay. Dell Disability Lawyers saved my policy, and helped to enforce the LTD company’s own policy (for its policy holder, me) that I would be covered still under the LTD policy I had paid for at my previous job, when my accident occurred. These lawyers know what they are doing and can help you too. LTD companies will try to drop you when you still need coverage just because they don’t want to pay on your policy anymore. Don’t let them break contract with ya because they are trying to get out of it. Hit em with legal action to ensure the continuation of your policy you paid for. Dell Disability worked very well for me and continue to do so.
I was denied long term disability benefits from The Hartford after being on it for years. I found Dell Disability Lawyers after doing research online. In a matter of days they responded and explained to me everything that would be done. Dell Disability Lawyers were able to settle my suit against The Hartford very quickly and responded to me quickly. I would definitely recommend this team of lawyers for anyone that is fighting for their disability insurance.
I have had nothing but a great experience with Dell Disability Law Firm. Mr. Alex Palamara and his team went above and beyond my expectations. They will respond to emails and phone calls in a timely manner. Thank you once again for taking my case.
This law firm is the best so far. MetLife denied me two times, they appealed two times for me and they won of course. So if you are on disability and want a chance at winning your case use this firm Dell disability lawyers, kind courteous understanding and they get the job done. You won’t be disappointed.