s

Tag Archives: insurance

Court Finds Regional Claims Administrator Qualifies as a “Managing Agent” of an Insurance Company, Justifying an Award of Punitive Damages

Posted in: Auto Insurance, Bad Faith, Breach of Contract, Duty to Settle, Insurance Litigation Blog, Punitive Damages May 29, 2019

When insurance companies, including those offering disability, life, health or accidental death policies, engage in conduct that is sufficiently egregious, a court may award punitive damages against the insurance company.  California Civil Code Section 3294 (“Section 3294”) provides that where the defendant is guilty of oppression, fraud or malice, the plaintiff may recover punitive damages for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.  If the defendant is a corporation, such as an insurance company, the defendant is liable for punitive damages if the act of oppression, fraud or malice was authorized or ratified by an officer, director or managing agent of the corporation or if the officer, director or managing agent was personally guilty of such …

Read More
0

Breach of Fiduciary Duty under ERISA: Ninth Circuit Clarifies That Mere Disclosure of Plan Documents Is Insufficient “Actual Knowledge” to Trigger Statute of Limitations

Posted in: Disability Insurance News, ERISA, Fiduciary Duty, Insurance Litigation Blog, Pension Benefits, Statute of Limitations January 23, 2019

In pension and savings plan cases, it can often take several years before an employee realizes that there has been a breach of fiduciary duty.  Typically, an employee’s financial loss triggers an investigation that later reveals the facts of the breach.  But how long does an employee have to bring a claim in court?  The answer depends on the employee’s “actual knowledge” of the facts of the breach or violation.  There is a conflict among federal circuit courts of appeal on whether an employee should be deemed to have knowledge of 401(k) prospectuses and fund information simply because the employer makes this information available to the employee.  In a recent decision by the Ninth Circuit, Sulyma v. Intel Corp. Investment

Read More
0

Court Says the Development of a Disabling Condition after Surgery for an Unrelated Condition Does Not Preclude Recovery of ERISA Disability Benefits under Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion

Posted in: Disability Insurance News, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Pre-existing Conditions January 16, 2019

Insurance companies often seek to exclude insureds from coverage through their long-term disability (“LTD”) plans by asserting the pre-existing condition exclusion.  If an applicant for LTD benefits has a non-disabling condition or becomes disabled as a result of a condition that developed after corrective surgery for an unrelated condition, is the applicant excluded from receiving benefits?  In a plaintiff-friendly decision, Hines v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am., 2018 WL 6599404 (N.D. Ohio Dec. 17, 2018), the court held that the plaintiff-disability claimant could not be excluded from coverage due to a vision disability on either the basis that she had received a diagnosis for a non-disabling condition before she became disabled or that she had developed a new …

Read More
0

Breach of Fiduciary Duty under ERISA: Making the Insurer or Plan Administrator Responsible for their actions towards a Plan’s Participants and Beneficiaries

Posted in: Accidental Death or Dismemberment, Equitable Relief, ERISA, Fiduciary Duty, Insurance Litigation Blog, Life Insurance, Waiver & Estoppel November 06, 2018

In a previous blog, we addressed the doctrines of equitable estoppel and waiver when the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) governs their insurance or pension plan.  As we explained, both doctrines provide an insured with methods of forcing an insurance company to honor its word and previous conduct.  However, insureds often have difficulty invoking the doctrines.  ERISA governs a wide variety of plans that provide life insurance, disability insurance, accidental death and dismemberment insurance and pension benefits.  Given the challenges of invoking equitable estoppel and waiver in the ERISA context, do plan participants and their beneficiaries have other ERISA specific tools to force insurers to honor their word and previous conduct?  Luckily, they do.  A lawsuit …

Read More
0

Los Angeles Daily Journal Publishes Article on October 26, 2018 by Robert McKennon Entitled “Court says insurer can’t dodge coverage through ‘technical escape hatch’”

Posted in: Accidental Death or Dismemberment, Disability Insurance, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Legal Articles, Life Insurance, News October 29, 2018

In the October 26, 2018 issue of the Los Angeles Daily Journal, the Daily Journal published an article written by the McKennon Law Group’s Robert J. McKennon.  The article addresses a recent case by the California Court of Appeal, which held that the notice-prejudice rule precluded the denial of life insurance benefits based upon the insured’s failure to give timely notice of disability as required under a disability premium waiver provision in the life insurance policy.  Insurers often attempt to argue that a technical violation of the notice requirements voids their claim where there exists no prejudice to them.  This recent opinion helps to reinforce the notice-prejudice rule in California and helps to protect insureds.

This article is posted with …

Read More
0

Waiver and Estoppel in the Ninth Circuit Post Salyers v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.

Posted in: Equitable Relief, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Life Insurance, Waiver & Estoppel October 16, 2018

Waiver and equitable estoppel serve as some of the legal systems’ fundamental checks on the fairness of a party’s actions.  Both doctrines serve to prevent an individuals and insurers from performing actions contradictory to what they have previously guaranteed or established via their conduct.  “A waiver occurs when a party intentionally relinquishes a right or when that party’s acts are so inconsistent with an intent to enforce the right as to induce a reasonable belief that such right has been relinquished.”  Salyers v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 871 F.3d 934, 938 (9th Cir. 2017) (internal quotations omitted).  Equitable estoppel “holds the [individual] to what it had promised and operates to place the person entitled to its benefit in the …

Read More
0

McKennon Law Group PC Insurance Litigation Blog Ranked as Top 50 Insurance Law Blog in the U.S.

Posted in: Disability Insurance, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Legal Articles, News September 26, 2018

On September 21, 2018, Feedspot created a list of the Top 50 Insurance Law Blogs, News Websites and Newsletters to Follow in 2018.  McKennon Law Group PC | Insurance Litigation Blog was selected by the panelists at Feedspot as one of the Top 50 Insurance Law Blogs and was selected the 13th overall Law Blog among thousands on the internet.  Feedspot ranked the Insurance Law Blogs on the web using Google reputation and search ranking, influence and popularity on social media, quality and consistency of posts and Feedspot’s own editorial team and expert review.  The article is posted below:

This article is posted with the permission of Feedpost.  Sep. 21, 2018.

<https://blog.feedspot.com/insurance_law_blogs/>

Read More
0

Insurance Company Bias in ERISA Cases: Hartford’s History of Bias and Discovery of an Insurer’s Biased Claims Administration Process

Posted in: Abuse of Discretion, Conflict of Interest, Disability Insurance, Discovery, ERISA, Health Insurance, Insurance Litigation Blog, Life Insurance September 26, 2018

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), a 1974 federal law, sets minimum standards for many employee benefit plans and serves to provide protection for individuals in these plans.  Discovery in ERISA cases is often limited because the statute’s primary goal is to provide inexpensive and expeditious resolution to employee benefit claims.  District courts are generally limited to the administrative record unless a so-called structural conflict of interest exists.  Considering that insurers make benefit determinations on life, health and disability insurance claims and profit when an adverse decision is made, this scenario creates an inherent conflict of interest whenever an insurer administers a claim.

Courts find that a conflict of interest exists where the “entity that administers the plan, such …

Read More
0

McKennon Law Group PC’s Trial Victory Included in Los Angeles Daily Journal’s September 21, 2018 List of Top Verdicts & Settlements

Posted in: Disability Insurance, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Legal Articles, News September 25, 2018

In the September 21, 2018 issue of the Los Angeles Daily Journal, the Daily Journal published a list of its top “Verdicts & Settlements,” which included the McKennon Law Group’s case of Brian Wright v. AON Hewitt Absence Management LLC, et al.  The judgment in Mr. Wright’s favor was rated as the third highest award of damages for a plaintiff for the period of time covered.  The McKennon Law Group PC represented Mr. Wright in a dispute over the payment of short-term and long-term disability benefits.  We won this ERISA case at trial and our client was awarded all of his disability insurance benefits, attorney’s fees, costs and interest.  The list includes a summary of the case and the …

Read More
0

Sitting: If you are Unable to do it, are you Totally Disabled Under a Long-Term Disability Policy?

Posted in: Disability Insurance News, ERISA, Insurance Litigation Blog, Policy Interpretation August 03, 2018

While most people tend to have a common-sense view of what it means to be disabled, under long-term disability (“LTD”) policies, an insured must satisfy the terms of a disability policy and its specific definitions of “disability” to receive LTD benefits.  Within the first two years of a disability claim, “disability” in a policy is normally defined as the inability to perform the essential duties of one’s own job. Thereafter, “disability” is usually defined as being prevented from performing one or more essential duties of any occupation for which an insured is qualified by education, training and experience.  This “own occupation” versus “any occupation” analysis is the source of a substantial amount of judicial opinion.

Insurance companies typically argue that

Read More
0