CIGNA overturns decision to terminate benefits of telephone sales representative with severe degenerative disc disease
CIGNA improperly terminated claimant’s disability benefits stating that the information in the claim file did not support a continued impairment to preclude her from performing her own occupation. It was apparent that CIGNA failed to consider relevant information which supported that the claimant was in fact, precluded from performing the material duties of her regular occupation.
In appealing the termination of benefits, Attorney Rachel Alters argued that CIGNA was arbitrary and capricious in terminating the claimant’s benefits when her medical records and treating physicians’ opinions were clear that she was incapable of performing full-time sedentary work. CIGNA’s disability determination was based on a selective review the claimant’s medical records. Despite the fact that the STD/LTD Plan permits CIGNA to conduct an Independent Medical Examination or Functional Capacity Evaluation, CIGNA chose not to perform any such evaluation. CIGNA’s decision not to perform any examination is significant because a dispute clearly existed between the opinion of her treating physician and that of CIGNA’s reviewing medical consultants.
The claimant’s treating physician documented that:
She had a poor outcome from her surgery and continued to be symptomatic with back pain. It was carefully explained to her that she has a collapsing deformity at the adjacent level L5-S1 and that pelvic rotation will be difficult, particularly sitting for any period of time on a regular basis. She should only be sitting for one hour at a time and then doing stretching exercises. She is incapable of doing any lifting. It was initially stated that she could lift up to 20 lbs., however, but now she is not to lift greater than 5 pounds. There is concern that a job sitting at a computer with lumbar spine hyperextension is impossible given the complexity of her spinal fusion and the residual deficits. She previously underwent injections and is reluctant to be put on high dose steroids due to possible complications and side effects. She was placed on very strict restrictions of no gainful employment where sitting is a regular part of her duties. She can sit for 30-35 minutes at a time and then would have to stand up. She will need the ability to lie flat at least every 2-3 hours given the complexity of her spinal condition. Without these limitations, she would have to be on high dose narcotics/steroids which are harmful and cause her side effects. She continues on NSAIDs which provide mild relief. She is unable to perform secretarial type duties as she can only perform computer work with sitting for only a minimal time period.
In prior office visit notes, it is documented by her physician that her back pain occurred across the L5-S1 level when she was in a sitting position and the claimant expressed her inability to work due to the sitting requirement of her job. Her physician expressed concerns regarding degenerative changes at the L5-S1 level because the CT scan performed on November 20, 2013 documented mild disc bulge at L4-5 and L5-S1 with mild narrowing of the central canal, early osteoarthritic changes in both SI joints, as well as indentation of the thecal sac at L5-S1 below the previous placed hardware. Additionally, in an office visit note from December 9, 2013, the physician stated that he believed the claimant could modify her work to get up once an hour to do stretching exercises. However, by March 27, 2014, it was clear that she experienced significant pain with activities, specifically bending, lifting and sitting, and he concluded that she was not capable of working for more than 4 hours with restrictions. On exam she was extremely uncomfortable and could not sit on the exam table, she could only lie flat. Exam revealed paresthesias in the buttocks and sciatic distribution with positive signs for sciatic tension, which followed the L4-5, L5-S1 distribution bilateral. In the standing position she was painful with flexion at 20 degrees or hyperextension. CIGNA completely disregarded the above opinions and medical records.
According to the Dictionary of Occupational Titles, the claimant’s occupation is classified as a “sedentary” occupation which requires lifting, carrying, pushing and pulling 10 lbs. occasionally, mostly sitting, and may involve standing or walking for brief periods of time. Based on the above, it was clear that the claimant was not capable of performing either her own occupation, or any gainful “sedentary” occupation.
After reviewing the appeal submitted by Attorney Alters, CIGNA overturned its decision to terminate benefits, paid her past benefits and put her back on claim. Attorney Alters will continue to manage her claim to help ensure CIGNA continues to pay her benefits.
Read more about CIGNA disability insurance claims on this page.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Get Your Cigna Disability Application Approved
Prevent a Cigna Disability Benefit Denial
Negotiate a Cigna Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Policy Holder Rating
Q: Can I add a physical disability claim to my mental health one without seeing a doctor (hard to get an appointment with COVID)?
What Should a Claimant Expect When Suing Cigna or any Other Disability Company for Long Term Disability Benefits?
Is a Claimant's Complaints of Pain Enough to Qualify for Short or Long Term Disability Insurance Benefits?
Is My Insurance Company Allowed to Take An Offset of My Monthly LTD Benefit for Social Security Benefits My Kids Receive As A Result of My Disability?
Is My "No-Fault" Auto Insurance Settlement an Offset Under My Long Term Disability Insurance Policy?
CIGNA Denies Technology Manager under the Own Occupation Provision & Dell Disability Lawyers Wins Appeal
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.