Met Life Slammed by California Judge for Long Term Disability Denial

In Tash v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (MetLife), Raymond Tash, a dentist, became disabled due to multiple injuries and was initially granted disability benefits when he could no longer work in his own occupation. After one year, MetLife discontinued its payment even though the policy provided for 24 months of benefits, so the dentist filed an ERISA lawsuit. That lawsuit was settled. MetLife paid Tash a sum of money and agreed to evaluate whether or not he qualified for benefits under the “any occupation” standard.

The “any occupation” definition required the plaintiff to be disabled if he was “unable to earn 60% of his prior earnings in ‘any gainful occupation’ that he is qualified to do.” This period began on February 11, 2013. Plaintiff’s documents supporting his claim were submitted in a timely fashion, which required MetLife to decide the claim by September 22, 2014. Despite the plaintiff’s repeated letters requesting MetLife to decide one way or the other, no decision was made. On December 3, 2014, almost three months after there should have been a decision, the plaintiff filed this ERISA lawsuit. MetLife only issued a denial letter on February 24, 2016, which was two days before the court ordered trial briefings to be filed. “As such,” the court commented, “Dr. Tash was denied his ability to submit evidence challenging MetLife’s grounds for denial before starting the litigation.”

The California Judge Reprimands MetLife for its Failure

The California judge deciding this case expressed his displeasure with MetLife by severely reprimanding it for its violation of ERISA statutory and regulatory procedures which “create an administrative procedure in which the claimant has the opportunity to introduce relevant evidence into the record.” If claimants are not given specific reasons for the denial, they cannot prepare an administrative appeal or properly prepare their case for a decision by a federal court. Although MetLife requested to file more documents with the court to justify its late denial, the court held the administrative record was closed on September 22, 2014, the date upon which MetLife should have either approved the claim or issued a denial letter.

The court found that “Met Life’s procedural defaults significantly disrupted the process of litigation in this Court. MetLife’s unexplained refusal to issue a denial letter until the eve of trial turned this case from a straightforward issue of whether Dr. Tash was disabled under the Plan into a tangled accumulation of filings and counter-filings regarding matters that distract the Court from the merits of this case.”

Court’s Disposition

The court issued orders based on MetLife’s “violation of ERISA and the resulting prejudice to Dr. Tash” and ordered it to:

· Pay back benefits with interest to Dr. Tash beginning on February 11, 2013 until the date of the order.

· Continue to pay benefits “unless and until it issues a denial that fully complies with ERISA.”

The case was remanded to MetLife “for a determination that complies with ERISA of Dr. Tash’s benefits under the ‘any occupation’ provision of the Plan.”

This case was not handled by our office, but it may provide claimants guidance in their pursuit of long term disability benefits when their insurer refuses to take action on their claim. If you need assistance with a similar matter, or any other issue relevant to your disability claim, please contact any of our lawyers for a free consultation.

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.

Leave a comment or ask us a question


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.


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