$1,000,000 in Unum Disability Benefits for an Attorney, Blackmail, and Supreme Court Denies Cert!

Disability insurance cases usually have similar fact patterns, but it’s rare that you see a case that involves an attorney as a claimant, blackmail from a convicted claimant, and Unum attempting to recover over $1,000,000 in previously paid long term disability benefits. On March 31, 2014, The US Supreme Court denied a long term disability insurance claimant’s Counsel for Petitioner, Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, relative to the case Truitt v. Unum Life Insurance Co., and presented the following questions:

1) Where an ERISA plan beneficiary brings suit to enforce the terms of a benefit plan, may the plan fiduciary then seek by counterclaim to have the beneficiary pay back benefits it already provided, a purely legal remedy unauthorized by ERISA, without undermining the will of Congress, the clear provisions of ERISA and this Court’s decisions interpreting its provisions?

2) Should Unum’s structural conflict of interest together with its history of biased claims administration act as a “tiebreaker” favoring allowance of petitioner’s disability claim where its decision-making process in denying petitioner benefits was procedurally unreasonable?

3) Were both federal courts below bound by Illinois law to employ a de novo standard of review in assessing respondent’s denial of petitioner’s disability benefits?

Facts relative to Question 1) Where an ERISA plan beneficiary brings suit to enforce the terms of a benefit plan, may the plan fiduciary then seek by counterclaim to have the beneficiary pay back benefits it already provided, a purely legal remedy unauthorized by ERISA, without undermining the will of Congress, the clear provisions of ERISA and this Court’s decisions interpreting its provisions?

Ms. Truitt was employed as a law firm partner and trial attorney/arbitration lawyer. She stopped working in 2002 due to persistent back pain despite surgery which was aggravated by the physical demands of her occupation which required frequent travel, frequent sitting and heavy lifting, among other duties.

Ms. Truitt was awarded benefits in 2003. Unum terminated Ms. Truitt’s benefits in 2006 due to purported findings in an FCE, an “independent” medical examination, and a file review, all conducted by physicians hired by Unum. Ms. Truitt appealed the denial and Unum reversed its decision in 2007 following a vocational file review conducted by Unum’s hired consultant which supported Ms. Truitt’s disability claim.

The Black Mail

A month after Ms. Truitt’s benefits were reinstated, Unum was contacted by one Andrew Thomas who, in exchange for money, offered to provide Unum with information that one of its insured was obtaining disability benefits under false pretenses. It is noted that Mr. Thomas is a career thief with multiple felony convictions and incarcerations who had pled guilty and been deported for physically assaulting Ms. Truitt while traveling with her and he had already tried to blackmail Ms. Truitt. Unum did not agree to pay Mr. Thomas but encouraged him to provide any information he possessed.

In late 2007, another of Unum’s hired physicians concluded that Ms. Truitt continued to be disabled and unable to work, and search of business records confirmed that Ms. Truitt had not been practicing law or claiming business income since she went out on disability.

Once Mr. Thomas was released from prison for the assault conviction in 2008, he again contacted Unum, claimed he had a personal relationship with Ms. Truitt and provided computer-generated emails during the time period of 2005-2007 which he claimed showed that Ms. Truitt had extensively traveled overseas and was performing legal work as an attorney. Without verifying the information provided by Mr. Thomas, in 2009, Unum suspended payment of disability benefits. In addition to the alleged email evidence, two of Unum’s hired physicians and Unum’s vocation consultant concluded that Ms. Truitt was no longer disabled and was able to perform the duties of her own occupation. Ms. Truitt’s benefits were terminated in October 2009.

Unum Seeks $1,018,098.36 In Overpaid Disability Benefits

Based on the alleged emails, Unum determined that Ms. Truitt had ceased being disabled as of March 2005, and because she wrongfully received benefits during that time period through August 2007, she owed Unum $1,018,098.36 in overpaid benefits.

Ms. Truitt filed an administrative ERISA appeal, but in 2010 Unum upheld the decision to terminate her benefits and sought payment from her in the amount of $1,018,098.36, which represented overpayments.

Ms. Truitt filed suit in the Western District of Texas, Austin Division under ERISA and Unum filed a counterclaim to recover the $1,018,098.36 it alleged Ms. Truitt had fraudulently obtained.

Claimant Wins at Texas District Court & Gets Reversed by 5th Cir. Ct. of Appeals

Unum moved for judgment on both Ms. Truitt’s complaint and on the counterclaim, which Ms. Truitt opposed. In his order dated 1/19/2012, District Judge J. Sparks denied both of Unum’s motions, declared Unum’s decision to terminate benefits arbitrary and capricious, ordered reinstatement of benefits from and after October 2009, and awarded Ms. Truitt reasonable attorney’s fees.

Unum appealed the District Judge’s ruling and in September 2013, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously reversed the district court’s ruling and entered a judgment in favor of Unum. The appellate court also vacated the ruling on Unum’s counterclaim and award of attorney’s fees to Ms. Truitt and remanded these matters to the district court for further proceedings. With regard to the counterclaim, the appellate court ruled that federal common law, not Texas law, applied as ERISA does not provide for how a plan administrator may recover benefits which it alleges were fraudulently obtained. Under federal common law, the court of appeals concluded that Ms. Thomas’ emails were sufficiently reliable to support a conclusion that Ms. Truitt was able to work in her occupation, and it vacated the district court’s finding that Ms. Truitt did not fraudulently obtain benefits and remanded this issue for further proceedings.

A petition for rehearing en banc was denied by the court of appeals.

In the Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Ms. Truitt points out that District Judge Sparks ruled that Unum failed to present evidence on its counterclaim that Ms. Truitt made false representations regarding her disability or that it had relied upon false representations, which is required under Texas law, because Unum had conducted its own independent investigation of Ms. Truitt’s disability claim. On this basis, Judge Sparks denied the motion for judgment on Unum’s counterclaim.

In replacing Texas law with federal common law, the court of appeals determined that Unum could still pursue the counterclaim for money damages based on alleged fraud and, by remanding the issue, the court of appeals resurrected the counterclaim seeking damages on the basis that Ms. Truitt had not been entitled to said benefits as of March 2005 and that she obtained the benefits through an act of fraud.

In the Petition, counsel for Ms. Truitt sets out that 29 U.S.C. §§ 1109(a) and 1132 (a)(1)-(5), provides plan beneficiaries and plan trustees with a number of equitable remedies when either one fails to comply with their duties under ERISA. However, ERISA does not provide plan fiduciaries the right to seek compensatory money damages from a plan beneficiary for benefits already paid. ERISA allows for awards which are equitable in nature, not legal, when there is an identifiable fund or separate property on which a levy or equitable lien may be imposed. A remedy for restitution in the form of money damages is legal, not equitable in nature because it seeks to impose a personal liability upon [Ms. Truitt in the instant case] to pay a sum of money. Additionally, even if it can be concluded that the money is property which belongs to Unum, it is no longer in the hands of Ms. Truitt and Unum, therefore, Unum assumes the role of a general creditor seeking to impose personal liability on Ms. Truitt, which is a purely legal action unauthorized under ERISA.

Counsel for Ms. Truitt unsuccessfully argued that, by allowing the counterclaim for monetary damages, the court of appeals contravenes the precedent set forth by Great West and Mertens, and undermines the intent of Congress, reinforced by Great West, that fiduciaries like Unum are not authorized by ERISA to seek this form of legal relief against a plan beneficiary. Further, the district court, to whom the court of appeals remanded this issue, lacks the jurisdiction to conduct further proceedings with regard to the counterclaim and said counterclaim should be dismissed.

Facts relative to Question 2) Should Unum’s structural conflict of interest together with its history of biased claims administration act as a “tiebreaker” favoring allowance of petitioner’s disability claim where its decision-making process in denying petitioner benefits was procedurally unreasonable?

District Judge Sparks determined that his deferential review of Unum’s denial of benefits must account for the inherent conflict of interest, as Unum both determined Ms. Truitt’s eligibility for benefits and then paid those benefits out of its own pocket. Judge Sparks noted that this factor was of “perhaps great importance” which can act as a tiebreaker in Ms. Truitt’s favor in this matter because Unum also had a well-known history of biased claims administration, as observed by the Glenn court.

Because Unum relied so heavily and put such great weight on the emails produced by Mr. Thomas, despite the fact that Ms. Truitt disputed the emails and that Mr. Thomas was a career criminal who previously tried to extort Ms. Truitt, Judge Sparks concluded Unum’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. Judge Sparks did note that, though substantial evidence supported Unum’s decision, the method by which Unum reached the decision was unreasonable. The structural conflict of interest became more important under the circumstances and became a “tiebreaker” for Judge Sparks to determine that Unum abused its discretion.

The court of appeals agreed that a structural conflict of interest existed for Unum. However, it ruled that Judge Sparks gave improper weight to the conflict when Unum had carefully considered Ms. Truitt’s claim and had publicly adopted new claims-handling practices that supposedly eliminated any biased claims administration. Moreover, even if the conflict of interest were of “great importance”, the record contained substantial evidence supporting Unum’s decision, indicating no abuse of discretion.

In the Petition, counsel for Ms. Truitt argued that, under Firestone and Glenn, federal courts reviewing a denial of benefits under the discretionary standard of review, when the fiduciary was operating under a conflict of interest, must employ a “combination-of-factors” method of review which takes into account the conflict itself, as well as any other factors which suggest the denial decision was unreasonable. The Glenn court ruled that a plan administrator’s conflict could be of “great importance” and become a “tiebreaking” factor favoring the petitioner when circumstances suggest the conflict affected the benefits decision.

Counsel for Ms. Truitt argued that the court of appeals “unwound” Glenn’s analysis by basically dismissing Unum’s tainted history and then by removing any duty Unum had to verify the authenticity of Ms. Thomas’ emails. The court of appeals cited to 3 prior decisions which noted Unum’s new claims handling practices and that those particular cases “diluted” this factor in deciding whether Unum abused its discretion. Counsel argued that reference to those 3 cases demonstrate that Unum’s conflict of interest and history of biased claims administration “is always the backdrop when a district court evaluates Unum’s denial of benefits for abuse of discretion; and the degree to which its past abusive practices enter into the calculus is not its unsubstantiated assertion that it has adopted new claims handling practices but whether it has employed those new practices in that particular case.”

Facts relevant to Question 3) Were both federal courts below bound by Illinois law to employ a de novo standard of review in assessing respondent’s denial of petitioner’s disability benefits?

Both parties agreed that Illinois law, to the degree not preempted by ERISA, was the governing law under the subject insurance contract. In 2005, Illinois initiated a regulation (50 Ill. Admin. Code § 2001.3) which prohibited the use of discretionary clauses in disability policies and required all courts to apply a de novo standard of review in ERISA cases which challenge a denial of benefits. Initially this regulation applied only to policies that were issued after 7/1/2005. However, in 2008, the Illinois Director of Insurance issued a bulletin instructing that this regulation will apply to all disability policies that were “issued or renewed” since 7/1/2005.

In the Petition, counsel for Ms. Truitt states that Ms. Truitt’s disability plan existed prior to 2005 and gave Unum discretionary authority. However, the policy was renewed on December 1st of every year. Additionally, on 11/1/2005, the policy was amended to make a material change in one of the provisions and therefore was issued anew. Based on these facts, Ms. Truitt was entitled to a de novo review. Counsel for Ms. Truitt also noted that the court of appeals in this matter (the Fifth Circuit), was in direct conflict with courts of appeals in the Sixth and Ninth Circuits, who both upheld state laws barring discretionary clauses in disability plans and mandating de novo review of denial of ERISA plan benefits.

The Supreme Court of the United States denied Ms. Truitt’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari without further explanation or discussion.

Read more about Unum disability claims.

Did you find this helpful?
Unhelpful (0)

Resources to Help You Win Disability Benefits

Disability Benefit Denial Options
Unum Disability Denial

Let’s discuss your case your Unum disability denial.

Unum Disability Denial

Submit a Strong Unum Appeal Package

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

Unum Disability Appeal

Sue Unum

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

Unum Disability Lawsuit

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

Learn more

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

Learn more

Negotiate a Unum Lump-Sum Settlement

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

Learn more

Unum Reviews

Policy Holder Rating

1.6 out of 5
Read 60 reviews
0%would recommend
Timely Payments
1.8out of 5
Handling Claim
2.1out of 5
Customer Service
2.1out of 5
2.1out of 5
1.9out of 5
Showing 8 of 642 Reviews

Low payments

Reviewed by Dorothy on November 30th 2023   Verified Policyholder | November 2023 date of disability
I was injured at work. I did house keeping in a hospital. I tore just about everything imaginable in my knee. I was let go from my job, because I was no longer able to do ... read more >

They closed my claim and I have been without income since they closed it

Reviewed by Mary C. on November 8th 2023   Verified Policyholder
Went off work on 9/26/22 due to back issues. Applied for Short Term Disability. On Jan 2023 switched over to Long Term Disability and Unum had me to apply for Social Secur... read more >

I feel like Unum is giving me the runaround!

Reviewed by Rachelle H. on May 11th 2022   Verified Policyholder
I have contacted UNUM multiple times since I’ve needed them. I feel like they are giving me the runaround! Please help!
Sent on May 11th 2022 by Attorney Stephen Jessup

Rachelle, the law provides certain timelines and deadlines with which to provide information or decisions. Please feel free to contact our office to discuss your situat... read more >


Unum terminated my benefits with no warning

Reviewed by K. Potter on September 9th 2020   Verified Policyholder
I was told I was covered with Unum through my employer (continuum). I got an email today for my termination, no prior talks of infractions with attendance, no warnings, no... read more >
Sent on September 9th 2020 by Attorney Stephen Jessup

K. Potter, termination as in your employment was terminated or a disability claim was terminated? If your employment was terminated and you had not filed a claim for di... read more >


I've been trying to care care of my Unum benefits for over a year. They’ve been so rude

Reviewed by Tracey W. on August 30th 2020   Verified Policyholder
I have been trying to take care of my Unum benefits for over a year. I’ve called and back in November I did appeal letter, they say they never received. I did everything... read more >
Sent on August 30th 2020 by Attorney Gregory Dell

Tracey, I am sorry to hear of your issues with Unum. We would love to learn more about your claim to see if we can get Unum to pay or if we can sue them with you. Pleas... read more >


I've paid for STD for 20+ years. Now, I'm actually sick and can't get paid

Reviewed by Natalie on June 29th 2020   Verified Policyholder
My employer uses unum for short-term disability. I was hospitalized back on june 13 and discharged on june 25. I was admitted for double pneumonia and hypoxia, which I end... read more >
Sent on June 29th 2020 by Attorney Rachel Alters

Natalie, hopefully your claim will be approved. If they deny the STD claim then you will need to appeal the determination.


Unum thought I was fine to work. I wasn't

Reviewed by Elizabeth L. on May 21st 2020   Verified Policyholder
48 yoa dentist POTs Dx aug 22. Attempted to return to work initially but got sick. Was going to go back 2 days/wk in September but could not. Then did go back part time as... read more >
Sent on May 21st 2020 by Attorney Stephen Jessup

Elizabeth, please contact our office to discuss the denial of your claim and your rights to pursue legal action against Unum.


Unum has made me feel like a criminal

Reviewed by Kevin on February 6th 2020   Verified Policyholder
Hi, I am currently receiving LTD from UNUM. I used to work as a Radiologist Tech at Vanderbilt Medical Center in Nashville, TN. for about 10 years. Than I started having g... read more >
Sent on February 6th 2020 by Attorney Gregory Dell

Kevin, I am sorry to hear all that you are going through and the stress this is causing you. The policy governing your claim likely does allow Unum to conduct an in-per... read more >

Answered Questions by Our Lawyers
Showing 8 of 97 Answered Questions

Q: Can receiving a Unum group LTD benefit settlement lower my SSDI benefit?

Answered on March 29th 2024 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Jeff,The acceptance of a Unum Lump Sum Buyout offer should not reduce your ssdi benefit. You should contact ... Read More >

Q: Do we have any legal action against Unum?

Answered on January 15th 2024 by Attorney Alex Palamara
A: I am sorry to hear of Unum’s actions here and how they have treated your claim, especially in their long del... Read More >

Q: Is it normal for “UNUM” to ask for a police report?

Answered on January 15th 2024 by Attorney Alex Palamara
A: Derrick, a simple answer to your question is Yes, if there was some sort of MVA accident which caused or contr... Read More >

Q: Unum stopped my COLA benefits at age 65

Answered on December 19th 2023 by Attorney Rachel Alters
A: Unum policies usually only pay COLA increases until you turn 65 even if the policy pays longer. Read More >

Q: Survivor's benefits

Answered on December 15th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Cindy: A few things come to mind. Your disability policy will have a section called deductible sources of inco... Read More >

Q: FMLA and my LTD claim

Answered on December 6th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Unum doesn’t consider FMLA as they only care if you meet the terms of your disability policy with Unum. Read More >

Q: Is the recipient responsible for overpayment when they had nothing to do with the reporting?

Answered on November 30th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Jeanne:The beneficiary, which would be you, is responsible for a legitimate overpayment regardless of who ... Read More >

Q: Does UNUM periodically review Group Long Term Disability Insurance claims/payments? For example, do they verify medical eligibility every five or ten years?

Answered on October 24th 2023 by Attorney Gregory Dell
A: Great question. The answer varies on the type of claim you have. On average Unum reviews medical eligibility e... Read More >
Helpful Videos
Showing 12 of 889 Videos
Disability Benefit Tips
Showing 8 of 331 Benefit Tips

Is UNUM a Good Insurance Company?

One common question the attorneys here at Dell Disability Lawyers receive comes from policyho... Read More >

How Long Does UNUM Long Term Disability Last?

When it comes to long term disability (LTD) insurance, every UNUM disability insurance policy... Read More >

Can You Sue UNUM?

If UNUM denies your long term disability insurance claim, can you sue? Generally, t... Read More >

How Does UNUM Define Disability?

UNUM Group - the Tennessee-based Fortune 500 insurance company that includes UNUM US, UN... Read More >

Beware of Traveling While on Disability with Unum

In the past several months our office has been hired by two separate clients who had individual disability policies purchased privately throug... Read More >

If I Sue Unum for a Disability Insurance Denial, What Should I Anticipate?

Disability insurance Attorneys Gregory Dell and Stephen Jessup discuss the numerous issues th... Read More >

Unum Disability Benefit Denial Trends, A Legal Perspective

In this video we discuss the recent trends they have observed with regard to Unum Insurance C... Read More >

A New Bait and Switch Tactic by Unum Disability Insurance Company

Unum reached a new low today which displays absolute disregard for the rights of a UNUM insured. Our law firm advised Unum in a January 16, 20... Read More >
Dell Disability Cases
Showing 8 of 375 Dell Disability Cases

Transportation Manager with Brain Injury Wins Unum Disability Benefit Appeal

Unum unjustly terminated our client’s long term disability claim after it had approved and... Read More >

Louisiana State College Director Wins Unum LTD Appeal But Then Denied Again

Client was Regional Director for the State of Louisiana. She was diagnosed with cervical rad... Read More >

Unum Approves LTD Benefits for Pharmacist with Eye Disorder

Rachel Alters of Dell Disability Attorney’s currently represents an Ambulatory Operations P... Read More >

Billing Manager With Back Disorder Wins Unum Long Term Disability Denial Appeal

Despite suffering with chronic knee and back pain for 7 Years, Unum still needed to be convi... Read More >

Unum Lifts Mental Health Limitation on Disability Claim

When our client first contacted our office and spoke with Attorney Stephen Jessup her claim for long term disability benefits had been approve... Read More >

Unum Approves Long Term Disability Application to a Program Manager

Our client, a high level Program Manager for a large international aeronautics company, was involved in an automobile accident that resulted i... Read More >

After appeal filed by Attorney Jay Symonds, UNUM overturned previous denial of long term disability benefits for South Carolina Nurse

Our client, Ms. L, formerly worked as a Registered Nurse for a nursing home. In November 2014 a number of chronic physical conditions and pain... Read More >

Unum Overturns Original Decision to Deny Benefits to Disabled Account Manager Following Appeal Submitted by Dell Disability Lawyers Appeals Team

In 2016, Sarah, an Account Manager, began suffering severe abdominal pain accompanied by bloody diarrhea. The frequency and condition was so s... Read More >
Disability Lawsuit Stories
Showing 8 of 765 Lawsuit Stories

Unum Wrongfully Terminated Disabled Lawyer’s Disability Claim of Depression and Anxiety Despite Improvement in His Condition

This Unum lawsuit and appeal in federal court is a great victory for all Unum disability claimants. This ca... Read More >

Court Rules Plaintiff's Medical Records Was Replete With Evidence Supporting Claim of MS & Was Not A Pre-Existing Condition

BackgroundIn Bayer v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, C.A. No. 18-9702 (E.D. LA 2020), Plaintiff began working as a seni... Read More >

After paying for 13 years Unum Denies Disability Benefits to Woman with Lyme Disease and Endometriosis

In Stephanie Dorris v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America (Unum), Plaintiff was President of Beans Plus, Inc... Read More >

Inexperienced Lawyer Handles Unum Disability Lawsuit and Fails to Provide Evidence to Support Occupational Argument

The case of Stephanie Dorris v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America (Unum) is an example of how an inexperien... Read More >

Can UNUM Deny LTD Benefits When Plaintiff Proves Eligibility by a Preponderance of the Evidence?

In the case of Paul Luu v. First Unum Life Insurance Company of America (Unum), Plaintiff had been employed by MUFG Union Bank ... Read More >

Is Remand Required If Plaintiff Proves Disability by a Preponderance of the Evidence?

In Ralph Dewsnup v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America (Unum), Plaintiff was a trial attorney with the law firm of&nbs... Read More >

Can Unum Deny My LTD Benefits After Paying For 15 Years?

In the case of Michael J. Christoff v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America (Unum), plaintiff was a partner in the firm ... Read More >

Court Rules Proper Standard of Review is Abuse of Discretion

In Christoff v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, Plaintiff Christoff suffered from severe fibromyalgia. He was insured under a group em... 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.