Liberty Mutual

In this case, David Diaz (“Diaz”) was the district manager at JM Family Enterprises, Inc. (“JM Family Enterprises”) between September 2010 and October 2015. JM Family Enterprises’ had an employee benefit plan which covered long-term disability benefits. This plan was insured by Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston (“Liberty”). Under the plan, the term “disabled” …

Diaz v. Liberty Life – Court Upholds Liberty’s Long-Term Disability DenialRead More

None of Liberty’s arguments persuade the Court that denying long-term disability benefits to Ms. Rouleau is appropriate. The preponderance of the evidence – indeed, the great weight of the evidence – reflects that Ms. Rouleau remained “disabled” as the Policy defines it even after the expiration of the “own occupation” period and is therefore entitled to the long-term disability benefits she seeks.

Rouleau v. Liberty Life – Court Assigns No Weight To Surveillance VideoRead More

The case summarized here involves Damon Zaeske (“Zaeske”), who was a project manager employed by Walmart. He ceased working on April 4, 2014, as a result of chronic back pain. Walmart’s insurance plan was underwritten by Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston (“Liberty Life”); Zaeske applied for long term disability (LTD) benefits through this plan. When reviewing Zaeske’s claim …

Zaeske v. Liberty Life – Appeals Court Reverses District Court Decision And Denies ClaimRead More

In this case, the plaintiff noted that the Policy’s states that “‘Proof’ means the evidence in support of a claim for benefits and includes, but is not limited to, the following.” Plaintiff thus argued that, while objective medical evidence may be sufficient to support a disability claim, it was not necessary to do so.

Gilmore v. Liberty Life – Court Finds No Reason To Doubt Claimant’s CredibilityRead More

Case Name: Rose Bigham v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle Type of Claim: Long-Term Disability Insurance Company: Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston a/k/a Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter “Liberty Life”) Claimant’s Employer: Amazon, LLC Claimant’s Occupation / Job Position: Security Technical Program Manager Disabilities: chronic intractable pain, fibromyalgia, …

Bigham v. Liberty Life – In De Novo Review Court Should Conduct Bench Trial On The RecordRead More

Because Liberty failed to consider the evidence of Plaintiff’s job description in its determination of Plaintiff’s occupation, ultimately leading to their denial of Plaintiff’s claim, Liberty abused its discretion under the policy and incorrectly denied Plaintiff’s claim. In assessing the appropriate remedy for the case, the Court saw no need to remand the case back to the administrator.

Sapp v. Liberty Life – Liberty Failed To Consider Plaintiff’s Job DescriptionRead More

In Kavanay v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, the plaintiff sought long-term disability benefits from Liberty Life, the insurer of his ERISA governed disability plan. The court held that Liberty abused its discretion, granted plaintiff summary judgment, and awarded disability benefits. The plaintiff worked as an insurance adjuster for Allstate; he was an “outside claims …

Kavanay v. Liberty Life – Court Rules Insurer Cannot Ignore Work Obligations During Own Occupation PeriodRead More

The Court held, “The level of activity or the lack thereof that Mr. Khalil reported to Liberty in support of his claim of continued disability was undermined by the video evidence that Liberty collected during the three years of review.” The claimant’s claim was further undermined by the fact that his own treating physicians ultimately opined that he was not disabled. The Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment and granted Liberty’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

Khalil v. Liberty Life – Surveillance Supports Denial of Long-Term Disability ClaimRead More

The parties’ supplemental briefing clarifies that, as an initial matter, they dispute the applicable policy to Plaintiff’s disability claim. Defendant argues that the Los Alamos National Security, LLC (“LANS”) Group Disability Income Policy (“LANS Policy”) applies to Plaintiff’s disability claim. Plaintiff disagrees and maintains that a University of California (“UC”) Supplemental Disability Policy (“UC Policy”) applies.

Evans-Carmichael v. Liberty Mutual – Federal Court Remands Non-ERISA Case To State CourtRead More

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