George v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company

Jan 15, 2015

OUTCOME: The Fifth Circuit ruled agreed with Mr. Roach that no mental/nervous condition “contributed” to our client’s disability because even without his diagnosis of depression, Mr. Roach’s client would still be disabled due to solely physical causes.

Reliance Standard attempted to limit disability period on a long term disability insurance policy to two years based on a two year limitation for disabilities caused by mental or nervous conditions whe ... n our client suffered depression following a physically disabling condition.

Scheuermann v. Unum Life Ins. Co.

Jul 06, 2010

OUTCOME: The Court agreed with Mr. Roach and concluded that Unum abused its discretion in denying long-term benefits.

Unum denied plaintiff’s long term disability insurance claim based on the report of its own expert but only after Unum both failed to supply the expert with an MRI which evidenced plaintiff’s injury an ... d after their own medical expert changed his original report without any additional evidence to find the plaintiff not to be disabled.

Robinson v. Aetna

Apr 12, 2006

OUTCOME: The Court of appeals concluded both that Aetna failed to substantially comply with ERISA procedures and that Aetna abused its discretion by terminating Mr. Roach’s client’s benefits.

Aetna denied Mr. Roach’s client’s disability claim on new grounds without giving the client the opportunity to address these new grounds in an appeal.

Garcia v. United States, 799 F. Supp. 674 (W.D. Tex. 1992)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Injured motorist brought action in state court against Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) agent for injuries resulting from automobile accident. Following certification that EPA agent was acting wit ... hin scope of his federal employment at time of accident, case was moved to federal court pursuant to Westfall Act. The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, James R. Nowlin, J., 799 F.Supp. 674, dismissed suit for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, and denied motorist’s motion to remand to state court. Motorist appealed. Upon en banc rehearing, the Court of Appeals held that: (1) certification by Attorney General that federal employee was acting within scope of his employment at time of allegedly tortious act is subject to judicial review, and (2) whether particular federal employee was acting within scope of his employment is controlled by law of state in which negligent or wrongful conduct occurred.

Rossi v. Precision Drilling Oilfield Services Corp. Employee Benefits Plan (5th Cir. 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Rossi v. Precision Drilling Oilfield Services Corp. Employee Benefits Plan (5th Cir. 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME: