• Applying for Standard Disability Benefits? Top 5 Claim Denial ReasonsApplying for Standard Disability Benefits? Top 5 Claim Denial Reasons
  • Denied LTD Benefits by The Standard? Lawyer Tips to Win an ERISA AppealDenied LTD Benefits by The Standard? Lawyer Tips to Win an ERISA Appeal
  • The Standard Insurance Company Long Term Disability Benefit Claims, Denials, Appeal and Lawsuit HelpThe Standard Insurance Company Long Term Disability Benefit Claims, Denials, Appeal and Lawsuit Help
  • The Standard: What To Expect With A Long Term Disability Benefit ClaimThe Standard: What To Expect With A Long Term Disability Benefit Claim
  • Who Makes The Final Decison To Approve Or Deny Disability Insurance Benefits? (Ep. 17)Who Makes The Final Decison To Approve Or Deny Disability Insurance Benefits? (Ep. 17)
  • A Senator's View of ERISA Disability Insurance Claims (Ep. 20)A Senator's View of ERISA Disability Insurance Claims (Ep. 20)
  • The Standard Insurance Company - Disability Buyout or Lump Sum Offer?The Standard Insurance Company - Disability Buyout or Lump Sum Offer?

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 too ill to work following the end of the 2014-2015 school year on June 10, 2015. She applied for her disability insurance benefit provided by her employer. She alleged in her claim for disability insurance benefits that her first day off work should be August 14, 2015, the day teachers were required to return to work, which made this her first day of missed work.

Plaintiff had an extensive medical history including heart surgery in 1997, donation of a kidney to her father that same year, spinal discectomy in 2007, and various biopsies over the years. Her main complaints, leading to the claim for disability, began in late 2013. She began feeling ill and weak. She reported to her doctors, “fatigue, headaches, muscle cramping, night sweats, palpitations, and rash.” She told her doctor she had done some research and thought she had Lyme disease.

Between late 2013 and the time she filed a claim for disability insurance benefits in September 2015, she saw her primary care physician and many specialists. At one point, she was being treated by nine different doctors. An orthopedist said she could not work due to pain in her spine.

Her primary care doctor, Dr. Harris, sent Standard a statement on September 9, 2015, saying Plaintiff had a primary diagnosis of Lyme disease with a secondary diagnosis of Bartonella. Dr. Harris also listed diagnoses of Babesia, arthritis, headaches, abdominal pain, diarrhea, nausea, and other gastrointestinal issues.

Dr. Harris stated, Plaintiff’s “physical, mental, and cognitive limitations and work activity limitations” were “due to muscle and joint pain, headaches, gastrointestinal issues” and opined “she is unable to function at work. Needs to remain out.”

On October 16, 2015, a Standard representative interviewed Plaintiff. The representative asked Plaintiff to send Standard her medical records from all physicians who had treated her including test results. Standard ordered medical records, but asked only for those from Jun 1, 2014 to October 26, 2015.

A vocational analysis conducted by a Standard employee found Plaintiff could do “a light duty occupation.” Standard commissioned a paper review by a doctor who noted that while Plaintiff had “multiple somatic complaints” there was “no diagnoses that establish any clear etiology” and no disease process that should limit her work other than an “arthritic knee.”

On January 12, 2016, Standard sent Plaintiff a letter informing her it had denied her claim. The letter informed her she could appeal the denial, but it did not tell her that there were any contractual limitations. She filed an appeal including 150 pages of documents. She added a lengthy letter.

Standard had an outside physician vendor review Plaintiff’s medical records, asking him to evaluate the diagnosis and treatment of Lyme disease and to evaluate whether Plaintiff’s symptoms were supported by the medical evidence. On October 11, 2016, Standard again denied Plaintiff’s claim and said she had not supported her claim with medical evidence and that “chronic Lyme disease is not an evidence based Sickness/illness” and Standard did not accept that as a valid diagnosis.

Plaintiff then filed this ERISA lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Court agreed with Plaintiff and ordered Standard to pay her total disability benefits for 24 months as required by her policy.

The Lawsuit was Timely Filed

Standard asked the Court to dismiss the case as untimely. According to the policy language, a lawsuit was required to be filed within three-years of the time “proof of loss is required to be furnished.” Standard argued that Plaintiff missed the deadline.

The Court pointed out that this was a case of apparently an ongoing disability, which changed the proof of loss date to 90 days after the end of the period for which the provider is allegedly liable. Applying that law, the three-year limitations period would expire on November 12, 2020. Since Plaintiff filed her lawsuit in March of 2019, her suit was not time-barred.

In addition, the Court found that Standard did not inform her of the application of the limitation period which was a breach of its fiduciary duty. This breach would not trigger the running of the limitations period. So, under this standard alone, the lawsuit would be considered timely.

Plaintiff Met Her Burden of Proving By a Preponderance of the Evidence That She was Totally Disabled

The Court noted that Standard’s review of Plaintiff’s claim, both initially and on appeal, “focused narrowly on discrediting Dr. Harris [Plaintiff’s primary care physician] as a quack, and casting doubt on Plaintiff’s reports that she had Lyme disease.” Standard’s doctor admitted Plaintiff had a number of “somatic complaints” but opined that “no objective identifiable disease process” limited her work. He “did not credibly opine on whether she could ‘with reasonable continuity’ perform the ‘Substantial and Material Acts’ necessary to being an elementary school teacher.’”

The Court gave “greater weight to the opinions of Plaintiff’s multiple treating physicians, each of whom witnessed and assessed her condition over a significant period of time.” The Court also commented that “Disability should have been measured by Plaintiffs functional capacity, given her symptoms, compared to her duties as a teacher…. Plaintiff’s primary treating physicians opined more often and more directly on her inability to work in any capacity. They relied on both their objective observations of Plaintiff’s comfort level as well as her own subjective reports.”

Ultimately, the Court concluded that, “Plaintiff has adequately established she was “totally disabled” under the terms of the Plan for the 24-month period. Accordingly, the Court REVERSES Standard’s decision to deny Plaintiff’s LTD benefits for the 24-month period and AWARDS Plaintiff $51,511.73 in disability benefits owed.”

This case was not handled by our office, but we believe it can be instructive to those struggling to obtain disability benefits from an insurance company that is searching for ways to issue a disability insurance claim denial. For more information about this case, or for assistance with your own claim, even if you have received a denied disability claim from your insurance company, and no matter where you live across the nation, contact us at Dell & Schaefer for a free consultation.

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

disability insurance companies complaints

FAQ

Do you help Standard claimants nationwide?

We represent Standard clients nationwide and we encourage you to contact us for a FREE immediate phone consultation with one of our experienced disability insurance attorneys.

Can you help with a Standard disability insurance policy?

Our disability insurance lawyers help policy holders seeking short or long term disability insurance benefits from Standard. We have helped thousands of disability insurance claimants nationwide with monthly disability benefits. With more than 40 years of disability insurance experience we have helped individuals in almost every occupation and we are familiar with the disability income policies offered by Standard.

How do you help Standard claimants?

Our lawyers help individuals that have either purchased a Standard long term disability insurance policy from an insurance company or obtained short or long term disability insurance coverage as a benefit from their employer.

Our experienced lawyers can assist with Standard:

  • ERISA and Non-ERISA Appeals of Disability Benefit Denials
  • ERISA and Non-ERISA Disability Benefit Lawsuits
  • Applying For Short or Long Term Disability Benefits
  • Daily Handling & Management of Your Disability Claim
  • Disability Insurance Lump-Sum Buyout or Settlement Negotiations

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.

Dell & Schaefer Client Reviews   *****

Marc F., DDS

My experience with Dell & Schaefer has been excellent. Courteous, prompt attention and questions answered precisely. Organized and efficient.

Read 434 reviews

Speak With An Attorney Now

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