Our client was a 51-year-old attorney/finance partner at one of the nation’s top three financial services litigation law firms. His practice integrated legal representation with multi-million dollar transactions and financings, litigation and dispute resolution, corporate counseling and regulatory and tax issues.
He was diagnosed with a neuroendocrine tumor and underwent chemotherapy treatment for many months. While the chemotherapy was successful in treating the cancer, it had a lasting and detrimental effect on his cognitive abilities. His ability to perform at thinking, analysis and strategy at high levels was destroyed.
Unum’s decision to terminate this claim focused solely on its belief that he had the physical ability to return to his own occupation was based on an inaccurate understanding of the material and substantial duties of his own occupation as an attorney/finance partner. Unum focused solely on the physical aspects of our client’s occupation and the fact that he was able to engage in recreational sporting activities. Unum never undertook any type of occupational analysis that truly appreciated the mental and cognitive demands of his occupation.
At our recommendation, our client underwent neuropsychological testing to support his position that he simply was not able to sustain the mental demands of his occupation on a regular basis. We used the results of this testing to aggressively attack Unum’s flawed vocational analysis, which was the crux of its termination of benefits. Our client’s claim is now reinstated and he is on claim.