Standard Insurance Company's attempt to dismiss disability insurance lawsuit is denied in-part by Florida Federal Judge
Disability claimant challenges Standard Insurance Company’s attempt to limit disability benefits to 24 months under the “Other Limited Conditions” provision.
Very often, disability insurance companies are being sued due to wrongful denial of claims or wrongful termination of disability benefits. There are occasions where a court will dismiss a disability claimant’s lawsuit if it is premature or not ripe. Insurance companies will routinely file motions to dismiss in an effort to either delay a decision on the merits or to win the case without the court considering the merits. Motions to dismiss are rarely granted. For motions to dismiss, the courts have to view the complaint in a manner that is most favorable to the plaintiff.
The federal rules governing civil proceedings don’t require a detailed plea from the plaintiff to base his or her claim on. Only a short statement as to the plea is needed to give the opposing party a fair notice of what the claim is and the ground upon which it rests. Nevertheless, the plaintiff is still required to allege “more than labels and conclusions”¦” and raises “”¦ [the plaintiff’s] right to relief above the speculative level.” The case of Brain S. Hayse vs. Standard Insurance Company is a good example of how the Courts implement the above mentioned rule.
The Background Of The Case Against Standard Insurance Filed by Disability Attorney
The plaintiff in this case enrolled in a long term disability policy that was issued by the Standard Insurance Company (Standard Co). On November 2008, after suffering a disabling injury, the plaintiff was awarded long term disability benefits by Standard Co. On October 27th 2010, Standard Insurance informed the plaintiff that his disability benefits would end on September 27th 2011 as they were limited to 24 months. The plaintiff then, filed a lawsuit against Standard Co claiming an anticipatory breach of contract and Declaratory Relief. In response, Standard Insurance filed a motion to dismiss both claims made by the plaintiff.
The District Court Rulings
The District Court in its ruling granted Standard Insurance the motion to dismiss the anticipatory breach of contract claim and denied the motion to dismiss Declaratory Relief for the following reasons below:
Claim of Anticipatory Breach of Contract is Dismissed by Court as it is not Ripe
The District Court ruled that the plaintiff is still receiving disability benefits from Standard Co until September 27th 2011 if the plaintiff remains disabled. Standard Co did not indicate that it wanted to repudiate the plaintiff’s policy but rather recognized that the plaintiff could become disabled due to a different condition in the plaintiff’s policy. In other words, the plaintiff has not shown that he had suffered damages due to Standard’s notification of the expiry of his benefits. Hence, the plaintiff’s claim for the anticipatory breach of contract must be dismissed.
Claim for Declaratory Relief Is not Dismissed and the Case will Continue Against Standard Insurance Company
The plaintiff’s other claim revolves around the issue as to whether he is subjected to the “Other Limited Conditions” classification contained in the Plan. Standard Co asserted that there is no actual present need for a declaration of the plaintiff’s future rights to benefits. The court recognized that Declaratory Judgments are “a valuable procedure for the resolution of insurance coverage dispute to the benefits of insurers, insured and claimants.”
The District Court ruled that before any claim for Declaratory Relief be entertained; it must be clearly shown that there is an actual need for the Declaratory Relief. In this case, the Plaintiff alleged that he is not subject to the “Other Limited Conditions” classification within the policy. And because Standard Co has already classified Plaintiff’s disability under the policy and the plaintiff disputed this classification, there is an actual, present controversy between the parties. The court ruled that resolving this dispute will determine the rights of both parties under the policy. As such, the Plaintiff is entitled to a declaratory judgment regarding his long term disability rights.
This case will continue and the court will eventually make a ruling on the declaratory judgment. Standard insurance company is represented by an experienced and well skilled defense attorney that our law firm has faced on numerous occasions.
Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits
Get Your Standard Disability Application Approved
Prevent a Standard Disability Benefit Denial
Negotiate a Standard Lump-Sum Settlement
Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.
Policy Holder Rating
Standard is one of, if not the worse, company in the industry Standard hasn't approved or denied my claim in over a year. They keep promising to look at it 'next week'
The Standard will threaten to withhold your pay until you sign every document that they send you. The worst part is when they consider back payment for SSDI benefits
Q: Why can my employer hold my disability check after The Standard sends it to them? Can I file a grievance with them?
Q: Is there any case law in which a state government employee LTD plan decided to drop the 24 month mental health limitation? Has there been any success against a state government and Standard using ADA Title I (employee) and 3 (insurance company) from a discrimination basis?
Can My Insurance Company Terminate My Disability Benefits After 24 Months if My Mental Nervous Disorder Contributes to But is Not The Sole Cause of My Disability?
Standard overturns decision to deny disabled Project Manager long-term disability insurance benefits after first Appeal
Another long term disability claim is reinstated after Disability Attorney Alexander Palamara successfully argues The Standard mishandled preexisting condition investigation
California Federal Judge Orders Standard Insurance Company to Pay Disability Benefits to Teacher with Lyme Disease
Claimant is Ordered to Pay Attorney Fees to Standard for Failing to Exhaust Her Administrative Remedies
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.