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

Nationwide Leaders in Disability Insurance Law

shook hands

Court Finds United of Omaha Did Not Engage in Reasoned and Principled decision making

Monday, January 21st, 2013

Another Federal Court has determined that a long term disability insurance company failed to engage in a reasoned and principled decision making process in the review and consideration of a claimant’s benefits. In determining that United of Omaha failed its obligations under ERISA, a Federal judge denied a motion for summary judgment and remanded the claim to the insurer.

The Court determined that United of Omaha’s interpretation of its policy was inconsistent with its earlier interpretations of the policy, where it had thrice previously determined the claimant to be disabled under the same definition of disability. The claimant, who initially was disabled due to shoulder problems, including tendinitis and impingement in his shoulder, was observed on surveillance which failed to yield any information inconsistent with his disability. United of Omaha also conducted a medical examination, which determined that the claimant should be capable of working a job that required keyboarding for 75% of the time. United of Omaha, through its in house medical personnel, further determined that the claimant provided a lack of effort and engaged in symptom magnification, ultimately determining that the severe pain complaints were not consistent with the lack of medications.

Following this, United of Omaha conducted a vocational evaluation, which created a watered down comparison of the claimant’s occupation and determined that he was able to engage in his “occupation” and terminated benefits. The claimant filed his administrative appeal, which was supported by numerous medical providers, and showed a worsening of his condition. The Court determined that United of Omaha had relied on improper vocational data in arriving at his occupation, and failed to show that his condition had improved since his claim was initially accepted.

Thus, the Court remanded the claim back to United of Omaha for further consideration.

Patel v. United of Omaha

Jason A. Newfield

Written By:

Jason A. Newfield - Disability Insurance Attorney

Jason Newfield is a founding partner of the disability insurance law firm Frankel & Newfield. He has spent the majority of his legal career advocating for the rights of disabled workers. He has lectured other professionals, worked on a Federal Advisory committee, and published many articles in the field of disability insurance claims and litigation.

Learn more about Jason | See Jason’s Publications



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.


*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.


This is about a Social Security Disability claim.

Ipad image

Download Our Free eBook


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

Sign Up for our mailing list to receive disability insurance law updates

Your information is 100% secure and will never be shared with anyone


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.

Contact Us
Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri
Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina
South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming