Dentist wins right to apply stricter standard of review in her case against Hartford for a claim for long-term disability benefits

(Group / ERISA Disability Policy) Carol Post, a dentist working at a hospital in New Jersey, was involved in a car accident in November 1993. Despite her whiplash injuries, she returned to work as a dentist, but was forced to stop working as a dentist because of her severe pain. She attempted in December 1993 to return to work as a pharmacist, since she also held a pharmacy degree. Ms. Post worked for nine months as a pharmacist and then was forced to stop working in September 1994 due to continued pain. During the period when she worked as a pharmacist, she averaged nearly a day per week that she was unable to work because of the pain. Ms. Post tried numerous physical therapy treatments that did not significantly improve her condition before attempting to return to work again in January 1995. Unfortunately she was forced to stop working once again in May 1995, because of her continued pain.

Evidence of Ms. Post’s treatment included records from 14 doctors over 10 years, beginning in 1993 following her accident. The treatments for her pain included:

None of these treatments provided significant relief to her pain. Her neurologist, a professor at Columbia University, opined that her numerous medical conditions, such as severe myofascial pain, chronic debilitating headaches, sensitivity to light, nausea, vomiting, and irritable bowel syndrome, and insomnia were caused by her car accident and rendered Ms. Post totally disabled. Hartford paid total disability benefits from 1995 until 2002, and Ms. Post was approved for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits on August 7, 1998.

After paying Ms. Post disability benefits for seven years, Hartford abruptly terminated her benefits in January 2002, following a review of her file by Hartford’s medical director, in which Hartford’s doctor concluded that Ms. Post was not totally disabled. After exhausting her administrative remedies by filing two appelas, Ms. Post then filed suit for her disability benefits, but the trial court entered judgment against her, agreeing with Hartford’s argument.

Hartford argued that the medical records revealed Ms. Post had only a whiplash injury, relying mostly on the medical records review performed by its own physician and an independent medical examination. Hartford also based their denial on feedback from doctors who treated Ms. Post in 1994 and 1996, on forms prepared by Hartford that did not allow these treating physicians to indicate that Ms. Post was totally unable to work.

On appeal, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, in Philadelphia disagreed with the trial court, noting that the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania had not properly considered that:

  1. Hartford’s denial was largely based on the review of Ms. Post’s medical records by its own physician;
  2. That Ms. Post had received a fully favorable decision on her SSDI claim; and,
  3. That Hartford aggressively used disability surveillance in an attempt to show that Ms. Post was not disabled.

Individually, each of these items was not enough to show that Hartford might have acted improperly in cutting of Ms. Post’s disability benefits. However, the Appellate Court ruled that based on the totality of all the carrier’s actions, the lower court could have found in favor of Ms. Post.

As a practical note, the lower court will have to reconsider their previous decision and re-evaluate Ms. Post’s case. There is no guarantee that Ms. Post will receive benefits even as the trial court looks at the evidence a second time, but at least Ms. Post will be given a second chance.

See Post v. Hartford Ins. Co., 501 F. 3d 154 (3d Cir. 2007).

DISABILITY INSURANCE COMPANY INFORMATION
Videos, Questions, Resolved Cases, Lawsuit Summaries & Company Reviews

disability insurance companies complaints

View videos, articles, resolved cases and claimant reviews about your specific disability insurance company.

FAQ

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

Bruce R. (Arizona)

Steve Dell has done an exceptional job with my disability application process. The firm is extremely well managed. They have acquired an incredible amount of experience over many years. I recommend them for disability insurance claims without reservation. 

Don (Florida)

I called this firm a few months ago completely disparaged due to a company cutting off disability benefits at a time that nearly caused me to lose everything.

Attorney Alex Palmera and Danielle worked hard to reach an amicable settlement and my case was settled a few months later. This is a good firm and the specific expertise in disability claims saved me countless hours of hassle at a time when an already fragile state existed.

Thank you Mr. Palamara and Danielle.

Sandra B. (Arkansas)

I have nothing but good things to say about how my buyout was handled with my disability claim. The level of professionalism was amazing. All of my questions and concerns were answered either by Danielle L. or Alex P. in such a timely manner and with such care I would recommend them in a heartbeat to anyone needing to approach their provider with buyout options.

They did a fantastic job communicating between the provider and me, always keeping my best interest at heart and always answering my many many questions. They really did take most of the stress out of this whole situation. I would give them a 10 out of 10 for every step of this crazy journey. Thank you so much for helping me through this.

Brenda R. (New York)

I needed assistance with an appeal for a LTD claim that was initially denied. Stephen understood what needed to happen to win the appeal and he did win the appeal for me.

Speak With An Attorney Now

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