Can a Disability Claimant Refuse to Attend an IME During an Appeal?

The main issue in Stevens v. Sun Life and Health Insurance Company is whether a claimant’s refusal to attend an IME means the administrative remedies have not been exhausted so that a subsequent ERISA lawsuit must be dismissed. The controversy began when Sun Life terminated Stevens short-term disability about the same time that she filed a claim for long-term disability benefits. This claim was denied and she appealed. Her appeal was denied and she requested reconsideration.

During the process of the Sun Life’s reconsideration of the appeal denial, it requested the plaintiff to undergo an independent medical exam (IME). Although she asserted that Sun Life had no right to ask this of her during the pendency of the appeal, her attorney wrote to Sun Life that he would agree for his client to submit to the IME with certain conditions: “if it is performed by a truly ‘neutral’ doctor upon whom we agree and if the entire IME is videotaped by a witness accompanying Mrs. Stevens.”

When the parties could not agree on a neutral doctor who would provide the exam and agree to be videotaped, Stevens filed the lawsuit. Sun Life moved to dismiss the court case since Stevens had not exhausted her administrative remedies. Stevens argued that according to the policy terms, Sun Life had no right to require an IME after it had denied her claim and an administrative appeal was pending.

Court Rules Administrative Appeals Were Not Exhausted Even Though Both Interpretations of the Policy Regarding IMEs are Reasonable

The Court found that “The terms do not specifically state whether a claim remains pending after the claims administrator issues an initial adverse determination.” It noted that plaintiff had provided additional medical evidence during the administrative appeal. This made Sun Life’s request for an IME reasonable. On the other hand, there was a “strong argument that Stevens’ interpretation of the terms of the plan, however, is reasonable.”

After analyzing dates of Sun Life’s request and plaintiff’s attorney’s responses, the Court held that the plaintiff had not exhausted here administrative remedies prior to filing suit. Ordinarily, this would have resulted in a dismissal of the lawsuit. But, in this case, the Court found it could waive the administrative exhaustion requirement.

Alabama Federal District Court, in This Case, Waives the Administrative Exhaustion Requirement

Relying on precedent, the Court held that “the court may waive the administrative exhaustion requirement,” particularly when “resort to administrative remedies would be futile or the remedy inadequate.” While the case was pending in the district court, Sun Life denied the plaintiff’s reconsideration request for benefits based on her refusal to attend the IME. Therefore, the Court held that “any attempt by Stevens to exhaust her administrative remedies at this point is futile.” The Court added a comment that “it is arguable that the terms of the policy regarding the right to an independent medical examination on administrative appeal in this case are ambiguous.”

This case was not handled by our firm, but we believe it can be instructive to those struggling with demands from their disability insurers for an IME during the pendency of their administrative appeal. If you have any questions about this issue, or any aspect of your disability claim, feel free to contact one of our attorneys for a free consultation.

Leave a comment or ask us a question

Questions About Hiring Us

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, 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.

Dell & Schaefer Client Reviews   *****

Ron G.

My experience of working with this firm was incredible! I can’t begin to tell you how easy it is to talk with these guys. I personally had Stephen Jessup assigned to my case. Stephen explains everything very well. He reviewed my case. He explained my options. Absolutely no pressure one way or the other from Stephen. I felt Stephen cared for me, my situation and worked through my case in the same manner. He answered all calls and my emails every time and unbelievably quick! Also, the secretaries are nice and wonderful. I felt that I was “in the loop” the entire process.

My case was a LTD with Cigna. I was on STD and then LTD for two years. All I can say is that I was very happy and grateful on the process and my outcome. Stephen is a great negotiator and can make things happen and DID!

***** 5 stars based on 202 reviews

Speak With An Attorney Now

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