Bon Secours Employee Wins Lawsuit Against Unum who had Denied Him Disability Benefits

A former Engineer Director for Bon Secours, with the help of his Pennsylvania  Disability Attorney, were forced to file a federal ERISA lawsuit after Unum repeatedly denied his claim for Long Term Disability Benefits under a disability policy he was covered under through his employment with Bon Secours. After filing Cross Motions for Summary Judgment, the Court ultimately ruled in favor of the claimant and against Unum.

While most Courts seem inclined to uphold most disability insurance decisions to deny benefits because of a pre-existing condition, in the case of Robert L. v. UNUM Life Insurance, that wasn’t the case. Evidently, the Court felt that Robert L.’s claim for disability benefits as a result of cardiac disease did not constitute a pre-existing condition even though Robert L. had been taking aspirin for hypertension and hypercholesterolemia during the “look back” period (the three-month period before the “effective date of” a disability insurance policy). Consequently, in Robert L. v. UNUM, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania found that UNUM abused its discretion when it denied Robert L. disability benefits due to an alleged pre-existing condition.

The question that the Pennsylvania Court had to answer in deciding a ruling on the cross motions for summary judgment in this case was whether or not treatment of a medical condition to prevent another more serious one and then having the more serious condition present itself is the same as already having the condition. This would make all preventative measures taken by a physician for the symptoms of some undiagnosed disease suspect and thus, very few disability benefits claimants would escape having a pre-existing condition.

ERISA Claim is Examined for Abuse of Discretion on the Part of UNUM

Per the Employee Retirement Insurance Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the Court must review a plan administrator or fiduciary review using an abuse of discretion standard of review. That means that the Court can take into consideration any conflict of interest that would have been present at the time of the decision, but the primary determining factor in whether or not the Court upholds the insurer’s decision is whether or not the decision was made “without reason, unsupported by substantial evidence or erroneous as a matter of law,” per case law, Doroshow v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co.

In Robert L.’s case, he and his disability lawyer alleged that Robert L. was entitled to long term disability and asked the Court for the following.

Background of the Case

Robert L. was an engineering director for Bon Secours when he ceased work due to the implantation of an ICD (implantable cardioverter-defibrillator). He had worked for the firm since November 2008. The implantation of the device to treat congestive heart failure was performed in September 2009 and rendered Robert L. totally disabled from performing the duties of his job in that the presence of an ICD caused Robert L. to be unable to be in close proximity to any type of electrical machinery.  Because of this, Robert L. filed a Unum disability application for long term disability benefits. Initially, UNUM denied Robert L.’s disability claim and continued to deny his claim throughout the insurer’s appeal process, and in October 2010, UNUM sent Robert L. a letter issuing its final denial of disability benefits stating that Robert L.’s congestive heart failure and need for an ICD device was a pre-existing condition. With the administrative remedies exhausted, Robert L. was forced to file this lawsuit against Unum.

UNUM Reviewer’s Reasoning Doesn’t Impress the Court

Unum’s reviewer reasoned that since Robert L. was taking aspirin and receiving treatment for hypertension and high cholesterol and had had coronary bypass surgery during the look back period, he was in effect receiving treatment for an underlying coronary disease (in this case congestive heart failure) and thus, had a pre-existing condition for which the insurer owed no coverage. Robert  L.’s attorney pointed out in their complaint that Robert L. was not taking high cholesterol and hypertension medications to combat coronary disease, but was taking those medications as well as aspirin for the “effects of the heart surgery he had in 1999.” It wasn’t unit 2009, some eight months after the effective date of his insurance coverage, that Robert L. was diagnosed with congestive heart failure.

The District Court Finds In Favor of the Claimant

Quoting several examples of case law on the subject of pre-existing conditions and the awarding of disability insurance benefits, the Court, in its Memorandum, pointed out that per two medical reviewers who were hired by UNUM, the two doctors agreed that “congestive heart failure and coronary artery disease are two separate conditions, with two very different types of treatment programs. And, that Robert L. was being treated for coronary artery disease to prevent development of heart failure, not as a treatment for heart failure. Consequently, Robert L.’s doctors did not diagnose him with heart failure during the look back period, nor did he have a pacemaker installed during that time. In addition, no tests were performed during the look back period with regard to suspicion of a heart condition, all leaving the Court with little choice but to rule that Robert L.’s congestive heart failure was not a pre-existing condition.

Read more information and see similar cases involving Unum.

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 Unum claimants nationwide?

We represent Unum 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 Unum disability insurance policy?

Our disability insurance lawyers help policy holders seeking short or long term disability insurance benefits from Unum. 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 Unum.

How do you help Unum claimants?

Our lawyers help individuals that have either purchased a Unum 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 Unum:

  • 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   *****

Jim

Got a yes for me. Greg was able to take charge of my disability case and turn their no into a yes. I am truly grateful.

Read 424 reviews

Speak With An Attorney Now

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