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 Sedgwick

Sedgwick

Here is a collection of all our content relating to Sedgwick.

Conner v. Sedgwick – Court Rules LTD Claim Denial Was Reasonable And Supported

Lisa Conner (“Conner”) was a perioperative nurse at St. Vincent’s Medical Center. Through her employment, she held a policy under the Ascension Health (“Ascension”) Long-Term Disability plan. Sedgwick administered this plan. The language of the plan explained that: On May 20, 2013, Conner was in a car accident that left her with injuries to her neck, left arm and left …

Conner v. Sedgwick – Court Rules LTD Claim Denial Was Reasonable And SupportedRead More

Sapp v. AT&T – Court Rules Sedgwick’s “Improper” Decision Was Reasonably Supported

In this case, Shenita Sapp (“Sapp”) sought to recover long term disability benefits that were denied by the administrator of her plan. Sapp argued that the claims administrator, Sedgwick Claims Management Services (“Sedgwick”) was acting in an arbitrary and capricious manner when it made its decision. However, the Administrator of the Plan, AT&T Services, Inc. (“AT&T”) argued that Sapp …

Sapp v. AT&T – Court Rules Sedgwick’s “Improper” Decision Was Reasonably SupportedRead More

Godmar v. Sedgwick – Decision To Deny Claim Was Arbitrary And Capricious

Disability benefits were paid for approximately one month and then were terminated. The termination letter acknowledged that “a medical condition may exist” but stated that “there must be objective medical information to support disability benefits” under the Plan. However, the court concluded that the decision to deny Godmar’s claim for short-term disability benefits beginning in July was arbitrary and capricious.

Godmar v. Sedgwick – Decision To Deny Claim Was Arbitrary And CapriciousRead More

Filthaut v. AT&T – Court Rules STD Denial Meets Arbitrary And Capricious Standard

The Court addressed several issues within the Plan’s determination that the Court found did meet the required arbitrary and capricious standard. (1) Whether the Plan ignored favorable evidence from the Plaintiff’s treating physicians. (2) Whether the Plan conducted a selective review of the evidence from Plaintiff’s treating physicians. (3) Whether the Plan failed to conduct its own physical evaluation of Plaintiff. (4) Whether the Plan relied too heavily on non-treating physician consultants.

Filthaut v. AT&T – Court Rules STD Denial Meets Arbitrary And Capricious StandardRead More