Ortiz Law Firm is dedicated to helping people recover the disability benefits they deserve. We handle group Long Term Disability (LTD) claims, individual disability insurance policy claims, ERISA disability claims, and Social Security Disability claims.

You are here: Home / Archives for Nick Ortiz

Nick Ortiz

Hounihan v. Aetna – Court Rules Claimant Is Not Totally Disabled

Charlie Craig Hounihan (“Hounihan”) was a technician who was employed by Proctor and Gamble (“P&G”) on the Bounty paper towel line at a plant in Cape Girardeau, Missouri. Through his employment with P&G, Hounihan was covered under both short and long-term disability benefit plans with Aetna. The Proctor & Gamble Disability Committee (“Disability Committee”) is …

Hounihan v. Aetna – Court Rules Claimant Is Not Totally DisabledRead More

Carty v. MetLife – Court Orders MetLife To Pay Claimant’s LTD Benefits

In this case, Gary Carty (“Carty”) worked as a manager of Eastman Chemical Company’s (“Eastman”) information technology department. Gary held a policy under the Eastman Chemical Company Welfare Benefit Program which Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) administered. Under the policy provisions, a claimant is considered disabled if he cannot make 80% of his pre-disability salary …

Carty v. MetLife – Court Orders MetLife To Pay Claimant’s LTD BenefitsRead More

Sangha v. Cigna – Court Rules Plaintiff’s Records Support Finding Of Disability

In this case, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California ruled in favor of Plaintiff Sarabjit Sangha and ruled against Cigna Life Insurance Company of New York. Specifically, the Plaintiff appealed Cigna’s denial of her long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits. After reviewing briefs submitted by both parties, the Judge overturned Cigna’s denial of …

Sangha v. Cigna – Court Rules Plaintiff’s Records Support Finding Of DisabilityRead More

Calhoun v. LINA – LINA Acted Arbitrarily And Capriciously In Denying Claim

Because the record establishes that LINA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in denying Calhoun long-term disability benefits, the Sixth Circuit REVERSED the district court’s judgment and REMANDED this case to the district court.

Calhoun v. LINA – LINA Acted Arbitrarily And Capriciously In Denying ClaimRead More

Tracia v. Liberty Life – Court Remands LTD Claim For Further Review

Bruce Tracia (“Tracia”) was an employee of Comcast Cable Communication Management, LLC (“Comcast”) and held the job of a business account executive. He had previously worked as a line technician and several other positions while working for Comcast. Through his employment with Comcast, Tracia was covered by a Group Disability Income Policy. Liberty Life Assurance …

Tracia v. Liberty Life – Court Remands LTD Claim For Further ReviewRead More

Bradshaw v. Reliance Standard – Reliance Misapplied Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion To LTD Claim

In the instant case, Julissa Bradshaw (“Bradshaw”) was a medical biller for Pyramid Healthcare Solutions, Inc. (“Pyramid”). She held a policy through Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company (“Reliance”) for both short-term and long term disability coverage. Her coverage under this policy began on May 1, 2013. When Bradshaw was hired by Pyramid, she was several weeks into a pregnancy. She …

Bradshaw v. Reliance Standard – Reliance Misapplied Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion To LTD ClaimRead More

Bey v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules Reliance Did Not Act Arbitrarily Or Capriciously

The Court found that ERISA preempts Ms. Bey’s state law claims and that Reliance is entitled to summary judgment in its favor in all respects. Given the thorough review by an independent physician, the Court did not conclude that Reliance acted arbitrarily or capriciously.

Bey v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules Reliance Did Not Act Arbitrarily Or CapriciouslyRead More

Ausler v. Aetna – Court Reaffirms That Plaintiffs Must Exhaust Remedies To Bring Suit

In this case, Tiffany Ausler (“Ausler”) worked as a software engineer for Boeing Corporation (“Boeing”). Because she was a Boeing employee, Ausler was covered under both short and long-term disability compensation plans where Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”) was the administrator of the plans. The plan brochure explains that an employee may be eligible for short-term disability benefits …

Ausler v. Aetna – Court Reaffirms That Plaintiffs Must Exhaust Remedies To Bring SuitRead More

Arning v. Aetna – Court Rules There Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Charles Buford Arning (“Arning”) was employed full-time by ECMD, Inc. as the President of the Arndt & Herman Building Products Division. Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”) administered a Long-Term Disability Executives Plan provided to ECMD employees. The Plan’s language provides: “You will be considered disabled while covered under this . . . Plan on the …

Arning v. Aetna – Court Rules There Was No Abuse Of DiscretionRead More