California Court orders CIGNA to disclose amount paid to MES Solutions for medical reviews
CIGNA Insurance Company can run but they can’t hide. Recently, the US District Court for the Central District of California granted Plaintiff Bradley Wojno’s Motion to Compel Defendant CIGNA Insurance to reveal the extent of it financial relationship with MES Solutions. Mr. Wojno’s disability attorney sought information from CIGNA that could unveil potential conflicts and biases of CIGNA’s hired gun doctors relied upon to terminate Mr. Wojno’s disability benefits.
CIGNA argues the information sought by Plaintiff is “wholly irrelevant.”
CIGNA terminated Plaintiff’s disability benefits based largely on testing performed by Dr. Schoenberg who was supplied to CIGNA by MES Solutions (“MES”), a company that supplies medical professionals to insurance companies for claim determinations. In order to determine the potential biases of MES and Dr. Schoenberg, plaintiff sought information on the amount of money paid by CIGNA or its affiliates to MES in the years 2006 through 2010 for medical examinations and medical reviews of claimants. CIGNA argued that the information sought is “wholly irrelevant,” but nonetheless agreed to provide the information pursuant to a protective order limiting access to the information to attorneys only.
Court rules that information sought is relevant to the parties’ claims and defenses.
The court explained that potential conflicts and biases of Dr. Schoenberg, on whom CIGNA relied to terminate the Plaintiff’s disability benefits, are plainly relevant. Furthermore, denying Plaintiff’s requested discovery would deny Plaintiff information that may bear on potential biases of MES and Dr. Schoenberg.
If CIGNA has relied on MES physicians over the years, this fact may indicate that MES, in order to obtain more business from CIGNA, supplies CIGNA with physicians likely to provide claim determinations favorable to CIGNA.
Traditionally, there has been little or no discovery permitted in ERISA cases, as benefit determinations are based on the administrative record.
In reviewing benefits determinations, courts have traditionally allowed little or no discovery in ERISA cases. This is because open-ended discovery would “frustrate a primary goal of ERISA to resolve benefit disputes inexpensively and expeditiously.” However, courts have permitted consideration of evidence outside the administrative record in de novo standard of review-benefit denials. In Welch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recognized that discovery aimed at demonstrating a conflict of interest was appropriate.
CIGNA contends that Plaintiff’s discovery is legally irrelevant because discovery typically is done to achieve a shift in the standard of review from abuse of discretion to de novo.
In reviewing ERISA cases, courts typically apply a de novo standard of review or an abuse of discretion standard. When the abuse of discretion standard is used, a court defers to the administrator’s findings and merely decides whether reasonable grounds supported the administrator’s decision. In a de novo review however, a court affords no deference to the administrator’s decision and reviews the claim as if it were for the first time.
CIGNA argued that Plaintiff’s discovery was legally irrelevant because it was not intended to achieve a shift in the standard of review given that CIGNA had already agreed that de novo review was applicable. However, CIGNA’s argument did not consider the Plaintiff’s purpose to determine the potential biases of MES and Dr. Schoenberg based on the amount of money received by MES and the incentive MES may have had in supplying medical professionals likely to be favorable to CIGNA. Furthermore, the court noted that CIGNA failed to cite any case that bars all discovery in de novo cases or to address the potential biases of MES and Dr. Schoenberg.
CIGNA failed to adequately demonstrate why a protective order was necessary.
Because the information sought by the Plaintiff was considered by CIGNA to be “commercially sensitive,” CIGNA pleaded for a protective order to safeguard such information. However, CIGNA failed to convince the court that protective measures were necessary and the court granted Plaintiff’s motion. The court therefore granted Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel without benefit of protective order. We look forward to seeing this information as we believe that CIGNA has paid MES a significant amount of money over the past years.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Submit a Strong Cigna Appeal Package
We work with you, your doctors, and other experts to submit a very strong Cigna appeal.
Sue Cigna
We have filed thousands of disability denial lawsuits in federal Courts nationwide against Cigna.
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
Payment delays!
Cigna (NYL) denied my claim
Hold up on payments!!!
Paid Family Leave
They should all rot in hell
They will constantly come up with anything to delay paying you
Don't count on Cigna!!! You will be very disappointed!!!
They will do anything to avoid paying
Q: Why can Cigna get away with not paying me anything for my disability?
Q: Do I have to be an active employee to apply for LTD?
Q: Can Cigna refuse to give me a copy of my short term disability policy?
Q: Is my plan governed by ERISA?
Q: Can I add a physical disability claim to my mental health one without seeing a doctor (hard to get an appointment with COVID)?
Q: Do you handle CIGNA cases in Florida?
Q: How can Cigna get away with not answering my calls?
Q: Do you handle closed cases only, or open ones as well?
Is Cigna Seeking To Offset Disability Benefit by Social Security Survivor Benefit?
Is Cigna's Denial of Your Appeal Really a Denial?
What Should a Claimant Expect When Suing Cigna or any Other Disability Company for Long Term Disability Benefits?
Are Cigna Short Term Disability Denials on the Rise?
Cigna's latest strategies for handling and denying disability benefit claims
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 Sued For Failing To Make A Timely Decision on Appeal
CIGNA Overturns a Waiver of Premium for Group Life Insurance Policy
Cigna Admits Error In Denying Disability Benefits
CIGNA Overturned Their Denial of LTD Benefits for Nevada Healthcare Coordinator
CIGNA Denies Technology Manager under the Own Occupation Provision & Dell Disability Lawyers Wins Appeal
CIGNA overturned previous denial of waiver of life insurance premiums
Dell Disability Lawyers successfully appeal denial of benefits to claimant with CRPS/RSD
LINA overturned its previous LTD denial for Medical Technologist
Reviews from Our Clients






