Sun Life disability insurance benefit denial is reversed after 8 years

Eight years of battling Sun Life for long-term benefits and the claimant finally prevails. Sun Life should be ashamed for their lack of respect for this disability claimant and their unreasonable claim handling. Sun Life’s attempt to use hired gun doctors was shot down by the court. This case is an example of a situation where a person could be disabled yet continue to be at work until the day they are fired. This case created challenging contractual issues for the claimant as she claimed that she was disabled at the time she was fired.

The Sun Life disability policy and all ERISA governed disability policies require the claimant to be disabled while they are actively employed by their employer. In order to avoid this situation, a claimant should always try to stop working if they believe they will be fired due to their inability to perform their job.

It is always interesting when a long-term disability company appeals the decision of the District Court. This is not as common as the claimant appealing a court decision, but it does happen. In this case, the parties involved were Sherry DeLisle and Sun Life assurance Company of Canada (Sun Life). The District Court had found that Sun Life’s denial of DeLisle’s long-term disability benefits was arbitrary and capricious. In plain language “arbitrary and capricious” means that the disability insurance company acted unreasonably.

Sun Life appealed the decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit which covers the states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee. Here is why the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the District Court.

History of Sun Life Disability Claim

Sherry DeLisle had been the director of operations at Sidney, Krandall & Sons, a retail jeweler, from January 1996 through April 2002. One of her employee benefits was the ability to participate in a disability plan which was funded by a group long-term disability insurance policy issued by Sun Life.

DeLisle was involved in a car crash in 1998. Her injuries required a full anterior spinal fusion. Then she was involved in a second car crash in 2000. This accident reinjured her spine. She also suffered a closed head injury.

She continued working with the assistance of three separate healthcare providers. She continued to see a neurosurgeon, an osteopath and a licensed professional counselor trained in cognitive behavioral therapy. But this assistance proved to be inadequate. She was fired from her job at Krandall on April 17, 2002, because “she was not doing her job.”

She initially filed for state unemployment benefits. She was able to find another job, but was fired after only two weeks for not being able to work enough hours. Finally in December, DeLisle filed a claim for long-term disability benefits with Sun Life. She supported her claim by providing her medical records and five attending physician statements. Each of the statements supported her claim that she had already been disabled from performing her “own occupation” as of April 17, the last day she worked at Krandall.

She also applied for long-term disability benefits through the Social Security administration. She was approved in 2003, with Social Security determining that her disability became effective on April 17, 2002.

Sun Life found that DeLisle was not covered under its policy because she was not “actively at work” when her disability began. Thus the disability insurance company denied her claim. It upheld its decision following her ERISA appeal, which led DeLisle to file an ERISA lawsuit against Sun Life.

Sun Life Ordered to Reconsider Claim by District Court

The District Court found that Sun Life’s denial was arbitrary and capricious. It set aside the disability plan’s decision and ordered Sun Life to review the case again and determine whether DeLisle was disabled on the day she was fired by Krandall. On remand, DeLisle supplied additional medical evidence, including opinions from a chiropractor, a physician who specialized in pain management and a neuropsychologist. The combined evidence showed that DeLisle was suffering from “degenerative disc disease, radiculopathy, symptoms connected to closed head injury, chronic pain syndrome, post-traumatic syndrome, major depressive disorder, and a Class 5 mental impairment.”

These medical records were sent to a clinical neuropsychologist, a psychiatrist, an orthopedist and a rehabilitation consultant. Based on the conclusions of these experts, Sun Life once again denied her claim. This time the reason for the denial was the lack of medical evidence that she suffered from physical, psychological or cognitive conditions of sufficient severity to prevent her from working in her own occupation.

DeLisle submitted an ERISA appeal to Sun Life. Her file was sent to three different physicians for review. This time a neuropsychologist, a psychiatrist and an orthopedic surgeon reviewed her information. Their opinions supported Sun Life’s denial.

DeLisle was once again forced to sue Sun Life for second time and effort to obtain her long term disability benefits. Once again the District Court found that Sun Life’s denial of benefits was arbitrary and capricious. The Court ordered Sun Life to pay disability benefits. Then at a later date, the District Court ordered Sun Life to pay attorneys fees. This resulted in Sun Life appealing the District Court’s decision.

Sun Life Appeal of District Decision Granting Long Term Disability Benefits

Because Sun Life was vested with discretion to determine whether or not DeLisle qualified for long-term disability benefits, the U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s use of the arbitrary and capricious standard of review. This meant that there were four factors the Court would consider.

  1. Did a conflict of interest exist?
  2. Had Sun Life considered the Social Security Administration’s determination that DeLisle was disabled?
  3. What was the quality and quantity of the medical evidence?
  4. What was the quality of the medical opinions?

Sun Life’s Conflict of Interest

The United States Supreme Court Case of Glenn v. MetLife made it clear that a plan administrator who evaluates and pays benefit claims operates under a conflict of interest. DeLisle’s ERISA attorney was able to offer more than conclusory allegations that a conflict of interest existed. The disability attorney pointed to the fact that five out of the six physicians who reviewed DeLisle’s file were under regular contract with Sun Life.

When the Court looked at the administrative record, it revealed that Sun Life’s in-house attorney had informed some of its medical file reviewers that DeLisle had been “terminated for cause.” This was in contradiction to what Krandall had actually told Sun Life in a phone interview. The transcribed copy of that interview said she had been fired “because she was not doing her job.” Characterizing her termination as one with cause put DeLisle in a negative light and suggested that there wasn’t any real reason to determine if sickness of injury had left her unable to do her job.

This procedural irregularity was just one hint that DeLisle’s file had not received a full and fair review. It would give more weight to the importance of Sun Life’s conflict of interest.

Sun Life’s Consideration of the Social Security Decision

The Court recognized that just because Social Security had determined that DeLisle was disabled, Sun Life was not obligated to pay her long-term disability benefits. At the same time, Calvert established that a Social Security administration’s decision “is far from meaningless.”

Sun Life required DeLisle to apply for Social Security disability benefits. If Social Security denied her application, Sun Life required her to appeal the denial “to all administrative levels Sun Life deems necessary.” Upon approval of SSDI benefits, the Social Security disability payments would reduce the amount of monthly benefit payable by Sun Life. When these two factors apply, the Court expects a long-term disability coverage provider to specifically mention in its denial of benefits why the Social Security finding of disability does not apply to the claimant.

While the failure to express its opinion regarding the Social Security decision would not necessarily make a denial decision arbitrary, the Court found it one factor to consider in measuring how much conflict of interest had played a role in the decision to deny DeLisle’s application for long-term disability benefits.

The Quality and Quantity of Medical Evidence Available to Sun Life

Sun Life argued that it was impermissible for the District Court to require Sun Life to determine whether or not DeLisle was disabled as of April 17, 2002. The Court agreed that it was DeLisle’s responsibility to prove whether or not she was disabled on April 17. But at the same time, the District Court had found that Sun Life’s reasoning process had been faulty in concluding the DeLisle was not disabled on April 17. It was in this context that the Court had ordered Sun Life to review the evidence demonstrating that DeLisle was disabled at the time she was fired from her job.

The Court of Appeals found that the District Court had not erred when it had reviewed “the quality and quantity of the medical evidence and the opinions on both sides of the issues.” As established in McDonald, a review must inherently look into the quality and quantity of the medical evidence.

The Court had seen the therapy notes and medical assessments in her file predating the time that she was fired. These notes included complaints of anxiety and depression, tremors, fatigue, spasms and double vision, prescriptions for a full neck brace and a notation regarding increased neck pain. While it was evident that DeLisle wanted to work through her ailments, the fact that she was fired demonstrated that she was physically incapable of doing so. One of her physicians went so far as to state that “although the disability date is 4/17/2002, the period of disability could have been long before that.”

Interestingly enough the Court found that at least four of Sun Life’s experts agreed with her diagnoses. The only difference came in how these physicians weighed the impact of her symptoms on her ability to work. The all concluded that her symptoms were not disabling. Not one of the physicians who reviewed her file addressed the opinion of her treating physician that her condition was progressive in nature and had not manifested itself by a “significant change” on a particular date.

Another concern that the Court expressed was the fact that it was not apparent the file reviewers were aware of Social Security’s determination that DeLisle was disabled. When combined with the fact that Sun Life’s in-house attorney had mischaracterized the reason for DeLisle’s layoff, the Court saw in the review of the medical evidence a failure to review this information in a deliberate and principled fashion.

Court Considers Non-Medical Evidence

Sun Life pointed to the fact that DeLisle had continued to work until she was fired, and to the fact that it had taken her several months before she claimed to be disabled. This made her case very similar to Rochow v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am. (CIGNA).

In Rochow, the claimant had been fired because he was unable to perform the material duties of his job due to short-term memory loss, occasionally chills, sporadic sweating and stress. Almost 11 months later, the claimant filed for long-term disability benefits. By this time the employer considered his coverage lapsed, but he successfully argued that he was disabled on the last day he was employed. In reaching this finding, the Court quoted from Hawkins v. First Union Corp. Long-Term Disability Plan. “There is no logical incompatibility between working full time and being disabled from working full time.”

Sun Life argued that DeLisle had told her physician that she was fired “based on personality issues versus job performance.” The Court found that this did not rule out the possibility that she was still disabled on the day she was fired or that she was fired because of performance related to sickness or injury.

Sun Life also argued that because she had been able to find employment for two weeks elsewhere, she was not disabled on April 17. The Court found that this also did not confirm her ability to work, because she was unsuccessful in her efforts to hold down a job.

Sun Life also pointed to the fact that she reported to unemployment that the reason she was fired was because of “lack of work.” This statement as well failed to negate, in the eyes of the Court, the possibility that her traumatic head injury and major depression at the time had not contributed to the fact that she was laid off.

Court of Appeals Issues a Split Decision

Two of the judges hearing Sun Life’s appeal upheld the District Court’s summary judgment in DeLisle’s favor. These two judges weighed the conflict of interest, the type of communication between Sun Life’s attorneys and the file reviewers, and the failure to acknowledge the Social Security determination of disability is strong factors favoring a finding that Sun Life had not been reasonable and deliberate in its reasoning process. The review of the medical evidence sealed the affirmation of these two judges that the District Court had reached the correct conclusion – Sun Life’s denial of DeLisle’s long-term disability benefits was arbitrary and capricious.

One of the judges dissented because she believed that the District Court had failed to apply the arbitrary and capricious standard of review appropriately. She pointed to the fact that under the arbitrary and capricious standard of review, the Court cannot weigh the conflicting evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the plan administrator. She cited Gismondi v. United Technologies Corp. and Whitaker v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co. to support her position.

Sun Life’s Appeal Denied

Because a majority rules at the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sun Life’s appeal of the District Court’s decision was denied. The fact that this was a split decision highlights why both disability insurance companies and claimants turn to the Court of Appeals. When three judges review the evidence, it is far more likely that a decision consistent with prior case law will be reached. Finally after more than 8 years of battling Sun Life, Ms Delisle will receive her long term disability benefits. 8 years is an exceptionally long time for an ERISA disability case, but it is a practical example of one disability insurance wrongful denial of long term disability benefits.


Did you find this helpful?
Unhelpful (0)

Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits

Disability Benefit Denial Options
Submit a Strong Sun Life Appeal Package

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

Learn more

Sue Sun Life

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

Learn more

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

Learn more

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

Learn more

Negotiate a Sun Life Lump-Sum Settlement

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

Learn more

Sun Life Reviews
(41)

Policy Holder Rating

1.5 out of 5
Read 41 reviews
2%would recommend
5
0%
4
0%
3
0%
2
51%
1
48%
Timely Payments
1.9out of 5
Handling Claim
1.9out of 5
Customer Service
2.0out of 5
Dependable
1.9out of 5
Value
1.9out of 5
Showing 8 of 41 Reviews
Sun Life

What a mess

Reviewed by Unknown on September 12th 2023   Verified Policyholder | July 2020 date of disability
This place has no idea what day it even is. First they attach my claim to my previous claim in which was a new claim. They messed up and denied me then made me wait yet ag... read more >
Reply
Sent on September 12th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell

I am sorry to hear what you are experiencing. Make sure you deal with Sunlife writing and follow up every day. If you would like assistance please contact us.

Sun Life

They leave you unable to fight

Reviewed by Kara on May 1st 2023   Verified Policyholder | July 2014 date of disability
I received LTD from Sunlife since 2014 until 2021. I still tried fighting in 2022. Somewhere they changed my claim from physical to mental but nothing in my medical histor... read more >
Reply
Sent on May 1st 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell

Kara:
Thank you for submitting a review about your experience with Sun Life. If you appealed your denial, then you may still have time to file a lawsuit to obtain... read more >

Sun Life

Sun Life is a real pain

Reviewed by Chris K. on May 20th 2022   Verified Policyholder
Sun Life is a real pain. I just want them to buyout my long term disability policy, but they keep playing around and around. I just to be left alone and given my lump sum ... read more >
Reply
Sent on May 20th 2022 by Attorney Rachel Alters

Chris, you can contact me at Rachel@diattorney.com and we can set up a call to discuss your buy out options.

Sun Life

Everytime SunLife receives my information they ask for another 7 to 10 business days

Reviewed by Joe M on May 31st 2021   Verified Policyholder
Told Sunlife I’m getting an attorney since my claim was filed April 16, 2021, still pending a decision and everytime they ask for more information and they receive it, t... read more >
Reply
Sent on May 31st 2021 by Attorney Jay Symonds

Joe, I assume this is a short term disability claim pursuant to a group policy issued to your employer. If so, the relevant federal claims regulations allow the carrier... read more >

Sun Life

I have lost everything due to non payment of my claim.

Reviewed by Lester H. on November 2nd 2020   Verified Policyholder
I have lost everything due to non payment of my claim.
Sun Life

SunLife said if I don't apply for SSI they will lower my payments

Reviewed by Jeffrey R. on July 26th 2020   Verified Policyholder
Sun Life is trying to get me to apply for ssi. Have long term disability though them been on it for 9 months. Live in PA. Telling to apply or they are lowering my payments... read more >
Reply
Sent on July 26th 2020 by Attorney Rachel Alters

Jeffrey, you are required under the policy to apply for Ssdi. If you don’t they will take an estimated offset and decrease you benefit by that amount.

Sun Life

I don't understand SunLife's overpayment letter

Reviewed by Gina L. on July 15th 2020   Verified Policyholder
My name is Gina and I have been collecting LTD from my previous employer through Sun Life for almost 2 years. I am currently easing back into the work force and I work a p... read more >
Reply
Sent on July 15th 2020 by Attorney Rachel Alters

Gina: I suggest you contact our office and speak with one of the attorneys to discuss the specific questions you have. At that point you can send along the letter.

Sun Life

SunLife screwed me one week after a C-section

Reviewed by Anna K. on February 17th 2020   Verified Policyholder
On maternity leave after cesarean section and told after my 1 week of wait time that I was only qualified for 7 weeks of short term pay. I understand waiting 1 week before... read more >
Reply
Sent on February 17th 2020 by Attorney Cesar Gavidia

Anna, you should appeal the decision made by the short-term disability insurer. Your denial of benefits letter should explain the timeframe in which you have to appeal ... read more >

Answered Questions by Our Lawyers
(29)
Showing 8 of 29 Answered Questions

Q: Can SunLife offset dependent social security benefits received on account of my wife's disability?

Answered on May 8th 2020 by Attorney Stephen Jessup
A: Dominick, unfortunately, employer provided disability policies contain language that allows for the offset of ... Read More >

Q: Does SunLife have a required time to make a decision? Can they request medical records that have nothing to do with my illness?

Answered on February 19th 2019 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Megan, in an ERISA governed claim Sun Life would have 45 days to make a decision and have the option of taking... Read More >

Q: What happens if a policy doesn't mention something I believe I had and paid for (COLA)?

Answered on July 14th 2018 by Attorney Rachel Alters
A: Rachael, if the policy does not mention a COLA then that usually means that the insurance company does not off... Read More >

Q: Can SunLife deny me on the basis on a preexisting condition?

Answered on June 15th 2018 by Attorney Alex Palamara
A: Scott, the policy governing your claim will define what is a pre-existing condition. If you were having sympto... Read More >

Q: Can I sue SunLife if I signed a Settlement & Release Agreement?

Answered on June 4th 2018 by Attorney Jay Symonds
A: RB, if you signed a Settlement & Release Agreement you are bound by those terms and would have waived your rig... Read More >

Q: Can I still get my short term disability benefits if I'm terminated?

Answered on January 26th 2018 by Attorney Stephen Jessup
A: C. Freeman, even if you are terminated you would still have legal rights under your policies. Your rights unde... Read More >

Q: Can I sue SunLife for pain and suffering?

Answered on January 12th 2018 by Attorney Stephen Jessup
A: Jim, under ERISA governed policies there are no actions for pain and suffering, only unpaid benefits. Read More >
Helpful Videos
(805)
Showing 12 of 805 Videos
Disability Benefit Tips
(329)
Showing 8 of 329 Benefit Tips

Tips for Applying for Sun Life Disability Insurance Benefits

If you're covered by a long term disability policy offered by Canadian-based carrier Sun Life... Read More >

Can a Disability Claimant Refuse to Attend an IME During an Appeal?

The main issue in Stevens v. Sun Life and Health Insurance Company is whether a claimant’s refusal to attend an IME means the administrative... 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 >

Disability Denial Reason #1 – Paper Review & IME

At Dell Disability Lawyers, we've seen insurance companies give countless reasons to deny lon... Read More >

How to Apply for Reliance Standard Disability Benefits & Top 5 Reasons for a Claim Denial

At Dell & Schaefer we’ve handled hundreds of long term disability insurance claims against Reliance Standard, and have learned a few thi... Read More >
Dell Disability Cases
(359)
Showing 8 of 359 Dell Disability Cases

Sun Life Overturns Its Previous Denial of LTD Benefits for Massachusetts Teacher

Our client, Ms. L, formerly worked as a Technology Teacher for a public high school in Massachusetts. For many years Ms. L suffered from chron... Read More >

After Appeal Sun Life Finally Approves Disability Benefits for Data Engineer

Prior to filing for disability, our client was employed as a Manager of Data Engineering Analytics for Avanade. A job he loved and excelled at... Read More >

Sun Life overturned previous denial of LTD for California Diagnostics Manager

Our client, Ms. G, formerly worked as a Diagnostics Manager for a regional Healthcare System. In October 2016 a number of medical issues, incl... Read More >

Unum and Sun Life approve disability benefits to OB/GYN

Our client, a well-established and experienced, OB-GYN, who had run a successful medical practice before becoming part of a hospital system, b... Read More >

After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, Sun Life overturned its previous denial of long term disability benefits for Florida ICU Nurse

Our client, Ms. A, formerly worked as a Nurse in the Intensive Care Unit. In September 2014 a number of medical issues, including chronic pain... Read More >

Sun Life Approves Disability Benefits to Surgical Services Director

Prior to filing for disability our client worked as a Surgical Services Director for a large hospital system. Her occupation came with an incr... Read More >

Sun Life ignored its own medical expert's opinions supporting registered nurse's inability to work in a sedentary occupation due to severe rheumatoid arthritis

Sun Life reinstated LTD benefits after Dell Disability Lawyers appealed wrongful termination of LTD benefits of registered nurse suffering fro... Read More >

Dell Disability Lawyers convinces Sun Life to Overturn Denial of Long Term Disability Benefits for a Person Suffering from Severe Cervical Disorders

An employee of FLSmidth, Inc. who worked as a Senior Procurement Agent since 2007 was forced to discontinue working in February of 2012 due to... Read More >
Disability Lawsuit Stories
(763)
Showing 8 of 763 Lawsuit Stories

Can Sun Life deduct Veterans' Benefits from a monthly disability insurance benefit payment?

The case of Marco Martinez v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (Sun Life) provides guidance in determining whethe... Read More >

California Court Reverses Sunlife Disability Denial for Woman with Fibromyalgia

In this video, disability insurance attorneys Rachel Alters and Gregory Dell discuss a Califo... Read More >

Court Remands Sun Life to Consider Social Security's Decision to Award Plaintiff Disability Benefits

In Green v. Sun Life Assurance Co., the issue concerned whether or not the claimant was continuously disabled during the 180-day required elim... Read More >

Sun Life's Video Surveillance Backfires & is Ordered to Pay Disability Benefits

In the case of Solnin v. Sun Life and Health Insurance Company, et al., the plaintiff, an assistant bank manager, injured her back at work and... Read More >

Court Rules That Sun Life Did Not Properly Review a Mental Nervous Disability Claim

In this video nationwide disability insurance attorney Stephen Jessup discusses a recent Sun ... Read More >

Criminal-Act exclusion does not apply without sufficient causal nexus

We get many calls involving claims denied based upon exclusions for losses or disabilities resulting from certain excluded conditions. Common ... Read More >

Court Awards Attorney's Fees After Disability Insurance Claim is Remanded Back to Sun Life

When suing an insurance company to recover disability benefits in an ERISA case, the three most likely outcomes by the court are; (1) awarding... Read More >

Accountant Punished by SunLife for Working Part-Time During Tax Season

Most long-term disability policies require a claimant not only be unable to perform the material and substantial duties of his or her occupati... 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.