Free Consultation 877.583.2524
We do not handle social security disability claims
logo celebrating

Nationwide Leaders in Disability Insurance Law

shook hands

Aetna’s Decision Lacks Substantial Evidence to Support Termination

Wednesday, October 23rd, 2013

A Federal Judge in Maine has ruled that Aetna’s decision to terminate a long term disability insurance claimant’s benefits was lacking in substantial evidence to support the decision. As a result, the Court ordered the claim to be further reviewed, following a remand from the Court, and consideration of an award of attorneys’ fees against Aetna.

The Court reviewed the history of the claim handling, and outlined how and why it determined that Aetna’s decision was improper. The claimant, who suffered from Lupus, and the resulting symptoms, restrictions and limitations of that disorder, including fatigue, and concentration issues, along with secondary depression, saw his claim terminated after 24 months of benefits, on the purported basis that he could engage in some occupation, a definition of disability that governed following 24 months of benefits.

Following the termination of the long term disability insurance claim, the claimant filed an appeal, and provided additional support for his ongoing impairments. Aetna rendered its final determination, upholding the termination of his claim, and compelled him to file a lawsuit to secure any relief. The claimant filed a lawsuit, and the Court’s evaluation of the evidence revealed that Aetna relied upon “faulty reasoning or mis-characterization of the medical record” for its conclusion. The Court took issue with the conclusory and unsupported statement by one of its hired doctors that the claimant “simply lacked motivation and drive”, noting that this appeared to be reductionist to the point of being unreasonable, when viewed against the reports provided.

The Court was also troubled by Aetna’s mis-characterization of the record as it pertained to the claimant’s treating doctor, where it claimed that the doctor agreed with the conclusions of no disability provided by Aetna’s hired doctor. The Court held that it was a stretch to make that conclusion, and was not fair to characterize the claimant’s physician’s opinions as such. The Court held that Aetna’s flawed review process “permeated its entire review process” and “undermines confidence in its conclusions.”

Despite such a strong indictment of Aetna, the Magistrate Judge determined that a remand was the most appropriate remedy, essentially providing Aetna with the ability to engage in similar conduct again.

Grosso v. Aetna Life

Categories

Archives

Ready To Talk?

Fill out the form to request a FREE legal consultation

Sorry, we do not handle SSDI/Social Security claims.

Frankel & Newfield does not currently handle any Social Security Disability Insurance claims.

CLOSE

*Required fields are marked

I have read the disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

CLOSE

This is about a Social Security Disability claim.

Ipad image

Download Our Free eBook

FILING A DISABILITY INSURANCE CLAIM

Secrets the Disability Insurance Companies Don't Want You to know! Download Now

HELPING THE DISABLED NATIONWIDE

No matter where you are nationwide, we are here to help.

We have the resources and support to take on the largest insurance companies.

Contact us today for our nationwide service.

CHAT
NOW