Standard Insurance denies disability claim to a wheelchair bound woman

Lynda Sacks worked as a mortgage loan underwriter for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. Her employer offered both short-term and long-term disability plans issued by Standard Insurance Company (Standard) effective January 1, 2005. Standard was responsible for funding both disability plans and making the claims determinations.

Policy language

In order to make a claim, the policy stated that Sacks had to be unable “to perform with reasonable continuity the material duties of [her] own occupation.” The policy defined “own occupation” as the duties connected to the job which could not be expected to be modified or omitted. The policy allowed Standard to compare the occupation with national norms.

The primary duties of Sacks’ position as an underwriter included approving or denying mortgage loans, following mortgage standards, reviewing and evaluating information on mortgage loan documents, and assembling documents in the loan file. While the job was primarily sedentary, it did include the need for occasional reaching, walking and handling documents and keyboard skills.

Disabling condition

Sack’s problems began in 2001, when she began to experience leg pain, and she would also fall occasionally. In 2003, she was diagnosed with peripheral polyneuropathy, Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease (CMT). CMT causes pain and affects mobility in both the legs, feet, forearms and hands. She was told that the disease is progressive, degenerative and incurable.

As her condition worsened, Sacks had to leave her three-story home in 2004 and move into a one-story home. Sacks missed a month of work due to a fall in 2006 but was able to return to work by using a walker. By 2007, her nightly leg pain was so severe that she began taking Nortriptyline so she could sleep. She found that the side effects of the drug the following morning, left her sluggish and in a mental fog, making work difficult and concentration a challenge. She found that she had to work extra hours to make up for the inefficiency of the morning, which only aggravated her symptoms.

Claim history

Finally, on July 10, 2007, Sacks stopped working. She filed a short-term disability benefits claim with Standard, claiming that her “extreme pain and difficulty when walking” made continuing to work impossible. Her neurologist provided a doctor’s certificate dated August 7, 2007 outlining her diagnosis of CMT. He stated that he supported Sacks’ application for disability. He also noted that she reported her hands were weaker than before and that she had been dropping things. In addition he also noted that she had mentioned that she was having trouble getting in and out of her car.

Sacks also visited a physical medicine and rehabilitation specialist, Dr. Kaiser, on August 13, 2007, for assistance with symptoms of back pain, hip pain and lower extremity weakness. On the day of her visit, most of her pain had resolved itself. The doctor noted at this visit that there was no evidence of muscular atrophy or significant weakness in the peripheral region of her limbs. She was referred to Kaiser’s orthotics department, and he recommended additional physical therapy.

Standard acknowledged Sacks’ claim for short-term disability benefits on August 24, 2007. She was told that she might need to provide additional medical, vocational, and financial information before they could make a final decision. Standard had a board certified physiatrist conduct a paper review on August 29, two days before they received a copy of her job description. With only the notes from her August 7 visit with her neurologist and her August 13 visit with the rehabilitation specialist, the physiatrist concluded that she should still be capable of full-time sedentary level work.

Based on this evaluation, Standard denied Sacks’ claim on September 5, 2007. The denial letter included four pages in which they recognized that she was having difficulty walking and standing, but they stated that walking and standing were not material duties of her occupation. She was advised that she could request a review and submit additional information, including the medical records dated from January 3, 2007, to the current date.

On September 22, Sacks appealed. She gave a history of the progression of her CMT. She pointed to how she had missed work for an entire month in 2006 because of a fall, how she was only able to return to work using a walker, and that she experienced pain night and day. She noted that her current braces no longer prevented her from falling. She also included a DVD she had made so a prosthetic specialist could evaluate her and included his clinical response received by e-mail.

In addition, she reported that she now had weakness and numbness in her hands. She claimed to have pursued numerous treatments in hopes of improving her health such as acupuncture, physical therapy, water aerobics, prosthetics, canes and crutches. She also re-emphasized the fact that her medication caused cognitive impairment.

Standard sent the file to a nurse whose primary conclusion was that if Sacks was having a problem with her medication there was nothing in the medical record to indicate that she had complained about it. The nurse found no new evidence present in Sacks’ appeal that supported impairment from a sedentary occupation.

The woman handling Sacks’ claim questioned whether CMT would preclude Sacks from a sedentary occupation for the inability to walk. She also asked if CMT would preclude Sacks from working due to lack of concentration. She sent the file back to the nurse for clarification.

The nurse tried to contact the physiatrist who had originally reviewed Sacks’ file. Unable to do so, she turned to a board certified internist. The report issued recognized that CMT is a progressive disease but found no evidence that Sacks was any less capable of handling her sedentary job than previously. The doctor felt that Sacks was no more likely to fall at work than at home. Based on these findings, Standard’s Benefits Review Department upheld the denial of Sacks’ claim.

Disability appeal denied by Standard

Sacks appealed. Her claim was referred to a benefits review specialist. In an October 18 conversation with Sacks, the specialist recommended that she provide additional medical information, as Sachs had a new primary care physician, who disagreed with her prior rehabilitation specialist. Sacks informed the specialist that all her doctors were with Kaiser. Sacks’ husband e-mailed Standard on October 19 to inform them that they were approved to request medical information from Kaiser.

Standard requested copies of Sacks’ entire medical record beginning with July 11, 2005 to the present. Two days later, they received records from all but her most recent physician. The medical record demonstrated the progressive nature of her disease.

The benefits review specialist then forwarded her file to a board-certified neurologist. After reviewing the records, this neurologist noted that Sacks would be prevented from “prolonged standing, walking, going up and down stairs, kneeling, squatting and lifting.” His recommendation was to compensate for these problems by purchasing a motorized scooter. He felt that there was no support for any specific side effects of the low dose of Nortriptyline prescribed.

While this neurologist saw no evidence that Sacks numbness and weakness were caused by the progression of her CMT, he did state that if it did begin affecting her upper extremities, she would be unable to perform the typical activities of her job which included fingering and handling. He recommended an independent medical exam to determine whether her upper extremities were involved because he saw no test had been performed to evaluate this.

Sacks responded to a request for this test, pointing out that she’d already had EMG testing done in 2006 which involved both her legs and her arms. The claim representative, like the neurologist, overlooked the upper extremity results.

Two months later on January 28, 2008, Standard arranged for Sacks to undergo an independent medical examination. After his examination, the doctor drew the conclusion that further study of the upper extremities should be conducted. He recommended a repeat EMG/MC. When the claim representative sought to clarify the doctor’s response to their question as to whether Sacks could perform her job as an underwriter, he said he felt it was necessary to draw comparisons between a new EMG and the previous one because he suspected a disease process was present.

The previous test had shown “very mild bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome with predominant sensory involvement”. Features of the test also suggested right ulnar neuropathy at the elbow. Even when these results were pointed out to the neurologist, he failed to see the same electrodiagnostic abnormalities as the second doctor and he continued to support Sacks’ ability to return to work.

On March 6, 2008, Standard upheld their denial of short-term disability benefits in a nine page letter that outlined the reasons for their denial. They claimed to have evaluated her “own occupation” using the U.S. Department of Labor’s classification of an underwriter as sedentary work, and use the US Department of Labor’s definition of sedentary work. They went on to list many other reasons why they were denying her claim, including the fact that none of her treating physicians had indicated any signs of disorientation during her office visits.

When the Court reviewed the case, they found that a structural conflict of interest existed, because Standard had discretion in considering the disability claim and funded the benefits to be dispersed under the plan. They also made the final decision on appeal. When they weighed the evidence, the court had to review Standard’s claim decision with skepticism and look for facts that might demonstrate that the decision was influenced by the insurer’s financial interest.

Here is what they found:

  • The initial denial letter gave no specifics as to what information Sacks needed to provide to support her claim.
  • They did not use valid occupational criteria to evaluate Sacks’ claim.
  • They asked the independent medical examiner to give his opinions on Sacks’ ability to perform “any sedentary occupation” not for an evaluation of her ability to perform her “own occupation.”
  • Standard refused to conduct additional testing when it was suggested.
  • Standard ignored Sacks claims that the side effects of her medication impaired her ability to work in the morning. The effects wore off by the afternoon and only affected her in the first half of the day. All of her doctor visits were in the afternoon, making it logical that no effects from her pain medication would be apparent.
  • The neurologist routinely earned about $230,000 a year from his medical consulting services for Standard.
  • The denial was based on a report from a doctor who noted that insufficient documentation was available for her review.
  • Standard determined, without reference to any evidence, that Sacks would be able to maneuver a wheelchair whether it was powered or not.
  • Standard used medical reviews that were based on incomplete records.
  • Standard rejected the claim partially on an absence of information which they knew they needed to make the decision. But instead of asking the questions, they violated their duty to fully investigate a claim.

The court found that Sacks’ medical evidence was credible. They found that even using the DOT definition of sedentary (as allowed by the policy), which requires a person to walk and stand up to 33% of the day, Standard’s denial of benefits would not be supported by her medical record. The Court found that Standard had abused its discretion using a definition other than that of her own occupation to determine that she was not disabled.

Not only did the Court reverse the claim decision, they ordered Standard to reinstate her plan, pay all benefits due up to the date of November 30, 2009, and to pay her attorneys fees and costs.


Did you find this helpful?
Unhelpful (0)

Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits

Disability Benefit Denial Options
Submit a Strong Standard Appeal Package

We work with you, your doctors, and other experts to submit a very strong Standard appeal.

Learn more

Sue Standard

We have filed thousands of disability denial lawsuits in federal Courts nationwide against Standard.

Learn more

Protect Your Benefits
Get Your Standard Disability Application Approved
We help claimants throughout the entire application process.

Learn more

Prevent a Standard Disability Benefit Denial
We manage every aspect of your disability claim following claim approval.

Learn more

Negotiate a Standard Lump-Sum Settlement

Our goal is to negotiate the highest possible buyout of your long-term disability policy.

Learn more

Standard Reviews
(25)

Policy Holder Rating

1.6 out of 5
Read 25 reviews
0%would recommend
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
2
60%
1
40%
Timely Payments
1.9out of 5
Handling Claim
1.8out of 5
Customer Service
2.0out of 5
Dependable
1.9out of 5
Value
2.0out of 5
Showing 8 of 25 Reviews
Standard

Standard insurance just dropped me with no communication with me.

Reviewed by D Larson on October 4th 2023   Verified Policyholder | June 2019 date of disability
I was put on Standard insurance by my employer in 2019. I was told by them when I was first on disability that I would be on this for the rest of my life. After 2 years of... read more >
Reply
Sent on October 4th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell

I am sorry to hear about your experience. Do you currently have a denial letter from them that you can email to me?

Standard

Standard is one of, if not the worse, company in the industry now

Reviewed by Anonymous Erisa Victim on December 5th 2019   Verified Policyholder
The Standard changed after the company was acquired by Japanese based Meiji Yasuda Life Insurance Company in 2016 and subsequently being delisted from the US stock exchang... read more >
Standard

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'

Reviewed by S.B. on August 22nd 2019   Verified Policyholder
My husband is covered by a Standard STD/LTD non-ERISA plan. He has a very rare neuromuscular disorder and was hospitalized in intensive care, was off work for 6 weeks (wai... read more >
Reply
Sent on August 22nd 2019 by Attorney Jay Symonds

S.B., this sounds extremely unusual and unreasonable, I suggest you contact our office and speak with one of the attorneys to address the specific questions you have re... read more >

Standard

I waited 5 weeks just to be told I can't receive benefits

Reviewed by Marissa on June 11th 2019   Verified Policyholder
After working overtime and stressing behind my job for the past 5 years, it resulted in me being diagnosed with retinopathy hypertension, at the age of 29, on 12/10/2018. ... read more >
Reply
Sent on June 11th 2019 by Attorney Gregory Dell

Marissa, I am sorry to hear of your diagnosis and the troubles Standard is giving you. Please contact our office at once for a free consultation. We would love to speak... read more >

Standard

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

Reviewed by Gena on December 10th 2017   Verified Policyholder
First of all, the worst thing that could ever happen to a hard-working person is a permanent disability. Fighting to secure payment is hard enough when you are well. Let a... read more >
Standard

Standard's sudden denial was inexplicable

Reviewed by Linda on September 13th 2017   Verified Policyholder
I was placed on disability by my doctor with a diagnosis of Cognitive Impairment (supported by both a neurologist and a neuropsychologist) which severely affects my abilit... read more >
Standard

Standard has keep me jumping through hoops for years

Reviewed by Donna on July 26th 2017   Verified Policyholder
I have been on LTD with The Standard since September 2011. The have had me jumping through hoops for all these years. Very rude if I call and ask a question. They say they... read more >
Reply
Sent on July 26th 2017 by Attorney Stephen Jessup

Donna, please contact our office with a copy of the denial letter so we can discuss in detail how we may be able to assist you in appealing the denial.

Standard

Mental health LTD should be covered under the Mental Health Parity Act

Reviewed by Kim V. on February 10th 2017   Verified Policyholder
My company contracted with Standard for our short and long term disability policies. In Jan 2014 I was on STD, which turned into LTD with a waiting period, which was tough... read more >
Answered Questions by Our Lawyers
(28)
Showing 8 of 28 Answered Questions

Q: Do I have to pay back LTD after receiving SSDI?

Answered on September 21st 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Hello. In most group disability policies there is offset language which states you must pay back any LTD that ... Read More >

Q: Non-taxable benefits have become taxable.

Answered on May 31st 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: I am sorry to hear what you are going through. We have seen you exact fact pattern with tax on ssdi when you w... Read More >

Q: How do I ensure Standard makes a timely decision with regard to my claim?

Answered on December 8th 2020 by Attorney Alex Palamara
A: Matthew, we are sorry to hear that you are having difficulty with your claim. While the insurance company does... Read More >

Q: Why can my employer hold my disability check after The Standard sends it to them? Can I file a grievance with them?

Answered on September 11th 2020 by Attorney Alex Palamara
A: Lucas, it sounds like your claim for STD benefits is under a policy that is self-funded by your employer. Thus... Read More >

Q: Should I contact you before submitting my application for a private disability benefit?

Answered on July 10th 2020 by Attorney Steven Dell
A: It is in your best interest to contact us as early as possible if you think you are going to need to file a lo... Read More >

Q: How can Standard deny my claim and expect me to work when I am disabled?

Answered on March 30th 2018 by Attorney Rachel Alters
A: Debbie, unfortunately this situation occurs often as there are two different departments reviewing your claim ... Read More >

Q: I'm waiting to hear back about my appeal. Should I hire an attorney?

Answered on December 1st 2017 by Attorney Stephen Jessup
A: Pam, if an appeal has already been submitted there may be very little an attorney could do at this point until... Read More >
Helpful Videos
(861)
Showing 12 of 861 Videos
Disability Benefit Tips
(329)
Showing 8 of 329 Benefit Tips

Applying for Standard Disability Benefits? Top 5 Claim Denial Reasons

At Dell & Schaefer, we've helped hundreds of clients recover long term disability benefit... Read More >

How to Prevent Standard Insurance Company from Denying Disability Benefits

If you have an individual or group long term disability policy with Standard, you may assume ... Read More >

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?

The "But For Test"In the case of George v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, The district court held that RSL did not abuse its di... Read More >

Dentist and doctors: beware of the Standard Insurance Company Group's long-term disability policy

The Standard Insurance Company sells multiple different long-term disability policies to dentist and other medical professionals. The differen... Read More >

Disability Benefit Denial Reason #4 - Your Doctor Is Misled By the Disability Company

When you're seeking disability benefits under a long term disability policy, your medical rec... Read More >

Disability Benefit Denial Reason #3 - Video & Social Media Surveillance

One thing many long term disability claimants don't know about (or expect) from the claims re... Read More >

How Do You Fight a Long-Term Disability Denial?

Getting a denial letter from your disability insurance company is one of the ultimate insults... Read More >

Disability Denial Reason #2 - Change of Disability Definition & Vocational Review

One of the top reasons for terminating a claimant's long term disability benefits involves th... Read More >
Dell Disability Cases
(369)
Showing 8 of 369 Dell Disability Cases

After Two Appeals The Standard Insurance Approves Short & Long Term Disability Benefits for Nurse

Prior to filing for disability, our client was a Registered Nurse employed as a Senior Case Manager for United Healthcare. Our client was a de... Read More >

Standard Approves Disability Benefits to Attorney with Fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia is a multifaceted illness that can affect every aspect of one’s life. While most people are aware of the debilitating pain and ... Read More >

Standard overturns decision to deny disabled Project Manager long-term disability insurance benefits after first Appeal

Terry had worked as a project manager for a large national health group earning over $85,000 annually, until type 2 diabetes left him disabled... Read More >

Standard Overturns Denial of Benefits to Shareholder of Major Law Firm

When Mr. L contacted us he had recently left a major law firm where he had been working for 27 years. Mr. L, a commercial finance and real est... Read More >

Disability Attorney Alex Palamara wins LTD Benefits for Police Officer Denied by Standard

Disability insurance companies are always trying to deny disability claims based upon a pre-e... Read More >

Standard Overturns Denial of Disability Insurance Benefits

Prior to contacting our office our client had been on disability with Standard due to Ulcerative Colitis and several other serious gastrointes... Read More >

Standard Overturns Denial of Disability Benefits to Chiropractor

As any chiropractor or anyone who has been to a chiropractor knows - chiropractic medicine is very physically intensive work. The wear and tea... Read More >
Disability Lawsuit Stories
(764)
Showing 8 of 764 Lawsuit Stories

Can Standard Insurance Company’s Failure to Raise an Issue be Considered a Waiver?

The case of Jose Chavez v. Standard Insurance Company has quite a history with the United States District Court for the Northern Dis... Read More >

California Federal Judge Orders Standard Insurance Company to Pay Disability Benefits to Teacher with Lyme Disease

In Tisha Entz v. Standard Insurance Company, Plaintiff Entz was a classroom teacher in Victorville, California from 1997 until she became... Read More >

The Standard's Denial of LTD Benefits for Financial Planner Upheld by Ohio Court

The Plaintiff in Daniel M. Wehner v. Standard Insurance Company (Standard) was an independent financial planner who was in... Read More >

Court Upholds Standard's Termination of Long-Term Disability Benefits

In Lopez v. Standard Insurance Company, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld Standard’s termination of long-term disabi... Read More >

First Circuit Finds for Plaintiff and Awards Retroactive Mental Health Benefits

In Jane Doe v. Standard Insurance Company, plaintiff Doe spent more than 25 years as an environmental attorney for a Maine law firm prior to b... Read More >

Standard Insurance Wins Appellate Remand for Claimant's Own Occupation Disability Determination

Cheney v. Standard Insurance Company and Long Term Disability Insurance (Standard) is a case in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sevent... Read More >

Claimant is Ordered to Pay Attorney Fees to Standard for Failing to Exhaust Her Administrative Remedies

In Spath v. Standard Insurance Company, the plaintiff was injured at work and was initially granted disability benefits. Upon a review of the ... Read More >

Oregon Court Orders Standard to Pay Plaintiff Prejudgment Interest

The current case of Robertson v. Standard Life Insurance Company concerns the proper calculation of prejudgment interest based on the court's ... Read More >

Reviews from Our Clients

Request a Free Consultation

Our Lawyers Respond Same Day

5 Ways We Help Get Your Benefits Paid

Get Your Disability Application Approved

Our goal is to get your application for disability income benefits approved. Applying for disability benefits can be a difficult process and the information you provide is critical. Most disability insurance companies look at your application in hopes of finding a reason to deny your claim. Your disability company will ask you to complete numerous forms, interview you, request lots of information, speak with your doctors and possibly request to have you examined by their "hired gun" doctor.

Through our experience of having helped thousands of disability insurance claimants, our lawyers will guide you through the entire application process and give you the best chance to get your disability claim approved the first time.

Submit A Strong Appeal Package

If your disability insurance benefits have been wrongfully denied, then our lawyers know exactly what it takes to get your disability claim approved. You only get once chance to submit an Appeal, therefore every piece of evidence that will support your disability claim must be included. The goal is to win your disability benefits at the Appeal level, but while preparing your Appeal you must consider how a federal judge will review your disability claim if your benefit denial is upheld.

Preparing a strong disability appeal package is an art that requires you to understand how the courts interpret your disability policy language, ERISA regulations / laws, and how to strategically present evidence in support of your definition of "disability". We encourage you to contact any of our lawyers for a free immediate review of your disability denial.

Sue Your Disability Company

98% of the disability insurance lawsuits filed by our law firm have resulted in either the payment of benefits or a lump-sum settlement agreement. Our disability lawyers have filed ERISA governed and private policy long term disability insurance lawsuits against every major disability insurance company in state and federal courts nationwide and we love fighting for the "little guy" against the multi-billion dollar insurance company giants.

We have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for our clients and we would like the opportunity to provide you with a free review of your disability benefit denial. There are many complex factors in a disability benefit lawsuit and the legal battle to win long term disability benefits can be fierce.

Prevent A Disability Benefit Denial

Approval of long-term disability is a continuous process as every disability insurance company will evaluate your eligibility for benefits on a monthly basis. You can never let your guard down and assume that your disability company will continue to pay your benefits for as long as you think you need them.

Our law firm offers a reasonable flat fee monthly claim handling service in which we handle every aspect of your long-term disability claim and do whatever it takes to make sure you are paid every month.

Negotiate a Lump-Sum Settlement

Let's discuss if a lump-sum settlement or buyout of your disability insurance claim is both available and makes financial sense for you. Our lawyers have negotiated more than five-hundred million dollars in disability insurance buyouts and we know how to get you a maximum settlement. A disability insurance company is not required to offer a buyout and not every disability company offers them.

Questions About Hiring Us

Who are Dell Disability Lawyers?

We are disability insurance lawyers that know how to get your short or long term disability benefits paid. As a nationwide law firm we have helped thousands of disability insurance claimants throughout the United States to collect hundreds of millions of dollars of disability insurance benefits from every major disability insurance company.

In more than 98% of our cases, our lawyers have been able to either get our clients paid monthly disability benefits or obtain a one-time lump-sum settlement. Our lawyers have seen it all when it comes to disability insurance claims and we know exactly what it takes for your disability claim to be approved.

We welcome you to contact any of our attorneys for a free immediate review of your disability claim. We also invite you to visit and subscribe to our YouTube channel where we have more than 700 videos and regularly provide tips to help protect your disability benefits.

Who do you help?

Our lawyers help individuals that have either purchased a long term disability insurance policy from an insurance company or obtained short or long term disability insurance coverage as a benefit from their employer. We have helped individuals in almost every type of occupation with monthly disability benefit payments ranging from $1,500 to $50,000.

Our clients include all types of employees ranging from retail associates, sales representatives, government employees, police officers, teachers, janitors, nurses, pilots, truck drivers, financial advisors, doctors, dentists, veterinarians, lawyers, consultants, IT professionals, engineers, professional athletes, business owners, and high level executives.

A strong understanding and presentation of the duties of your occupation is essential for securing disability insurance benefits.

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 phone, email, fax, GoToMeeting 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 800-698-9159 or by email. Lawyers 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.