The Standard Insurance Company loses their battle to enforce discretionary clauses in long-term disability policies

Once again the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has upheld a state’s rights to protect employees that have long-term disability insurance policies issued by their employers. In an opinion filed on October 27, 2009, three circuit judges on the ninth circuit reached a unanimous decision that a state’s practice of disapproving insurance policies that contain clauses that vest insurers with discretion in how they process long-term disability claims and who they issue these claims to is legal and does not conflict with Federal law. The court agreed that a discretionary clause in a long-term disability plans is not valid. This is a major victory for disability claimants; however this ruling is only binding in the following states: Washington, Oregon, Montana, California, Arizona, Idaho and Nevada.

The use of discretionary clauses in long-term insurance policies has been a long-standing issue between the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) and insurance companies. The NAIC claims that the practice leads to insurance companies engaging in inappropriate practices and using these clauses as a shield when questioned about a decision to deny a long-term disability claim. Insurance companies argue that discretionary clauses save both insurance companies and the taxpayer money by reducing the number of cases that are filed, as well as reducing the cost of reviewing cases that go to court.

This specific case revolved around the right of Montana’s state auditor, John Morrison who acts as commissioner of insurance within that capacity, to refuse to approve disability insurance forms submitted to him by Standard Insurance Company (“Standard”). The forms submitted to Morrison included discretionary clauses.

Standard took Morrison to court, arguing that his right to disapprove the forms was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). This is what the judges had to determine. Had Montana law run afoul of ERISA? Or was Morrison lawfully operating under the so-called savings clause that retains a state’s rights to regulate insurance, banking and securities within its jurisdiction?

Standard claimed that Morrison’s practice of denying approval of insurance forms with discretionary clauses was preempted by ERISA. In order to support their claim, they had to prove two things:

  1. the state law they were contesting was not specifically directed at entities engaged in insurance; and
  2. the law did not substantially affect the risk pooling arrangement between Standard and the people they insured.

While Morrison’s practice of denying approval to “any form” that contained “inconsistent, ambiguous, or misleading clauses or exceptions and conditions which deceptively affects the risk purported to be assumed in the general coverage of the contract…” (Mont. Code Ann. §33-1-502) clearly covered more than insurance and was being applied to employee benefit plans, was Standard right in claiming that Morrison’s practice was directed toward ERISA plans and procedures not insurance companies? The court said no on the following grounds. First, the judges ruled that ERISA plans are a form of insurance, and “any practice” that “regulates insurance companies by limiting what they can and cannot include in their insurance policies” is deemed to regulate insurance. The judges found that Commissioner Morrison’s refusal to approve discretionary clauses was part of his power to regulate allegedly unfair and misleading practices in the insurance industry as a whole within the state.

Standard claimed that Montana’s law only applied the common-law rule that contracts are interpreted against their drafter. The court disagreed. They found that the state did not require approval of most contracts but did require approval of insurance contracts. Morrison’s practice of disapproving insurance forms containing discretionary clauses was specific to the insurance industry. The court also found that Morrison’s practice applied to all insurers and was grounded in policy concerns that are specific to the insurance industry.

Standard lost the argument that Montana’s law did not directly regulate insurance. Standard needed to prove that Montana’s law did not substantially affect the risk pooling arrangement between insurer and insured to win their case.

In a nutshell, risk pooling involves accepting premiums from a number of policy holders after evaluating the level of risk that one of these policy holders will have a claim, and then dividing the cost of that risk between all of the policy holders. Standard wanted the court to accept their definition of risk pooling, “risk is pooled at the time the insurance contract is made, not at the time a claim is made.” The insurance company did not want other factors such as claim investigation costs or the appeals process to be included.

The court rejected this limited definition based on a Supreme Court ruling that extends the definition of risk pool to include state statutes that forbid insurance companies from discriminating against any doctor who is willing to meet the terms and conditions laid out in the health plan. The court ruled that because Montana insured’s cannot agree to a discretionary clause that lowers their premium, Montana’s law effectively impacts the risk pooling arrangement between the insurer and the insured. Also, Morrison’s disapproval of discretionary clauses “dictates to the insurance company the conditions under which it must pay for the risk it has assumed.” The court stated that in its opinion Morrison’s practices were more likely to lead to more claims being paid.

The application of Montana law clearly affected risk pooling. Montana’s law was clearly saved under both points and was not preempted by ERISA.

Standard went on to argue that Montana law conflicted with ERISA’s exclusive remedial scheme for insured’s who have been denied benefits. The court did not find this conflict. Instead if found that Morrison’s actions were in harmony with ERISA process.

Standard’s final argument was that “a state’s forbidding discretionary clauses is inconsistent with the purpose and policy of the ERISA remedial system, which emphasizes a balance between protecting employees’ right to benefits and incentivizing employers to offer benefit plans.” Standard relied on a United States Supreme Court decision from Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Glenn where the Court noted that a conflict of interest exists when the entity determining eligibility for benefit also bears the financial burden for paying for them. While the court recognized this fact, it refused to repudiate the abuse-of-discretion standard, even if it was willing to temper its decision by the abuse-of-conflict standard.

The Court’s final opinion, based on case law, states that the state has a perfectly appropriate right to eliminate anything that minimizes scrutiny of an insurance plan’s denial of benefits. The Court equated Commissioner Morrison’s actions as similar, because they prevent insurers from inserting terms into their policies that tip the balance in their favor. The Court has found that there was no need to create an exception to the savings clause, because Morrison’s practice is directed at eliminating insurer advantage and does not fall within the scope of exceptions to the savings clause.

This ruling is one of several battles that have been won at the state level in recent years. It reflects the Court’s interpretation of the stance ERISA takes toward discretionary clauses – an automatic in-depth review of any claims of improper denial of benefits. We see this ruling as very good news for all employees that have a long-term disability insurance policy issued by their employer. Not only does the ruling support state rights to protect consumers, it also reflects a pro consumer attitude on the part of the court system that makes it easier for consumers to avail themselves of the benefits they have paid into the system to receive in the event they are disabled.


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.