Case Explained: MENDOZA V. FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-10 Docket: 3:24-cv-00834-H-VET The ninth-circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment upholding the denial of long-term disability benefits in an ERISA action. Reviewing for clear error regarding factual findings and de novo regarding legal conclusions, the court held that the claimant bears the burden of proving disability by a preponderance of the evidence under the plan terms. The panel rejected arguments that examining physicians warrant special deference over non-examining ones, that prior short-term disability payments create a legal presumption of long-term disability, or that the district court clearly erred by adopting subsidiary rationales regarding malingering and witness credibility consistent with the insurer’s original denial rationale. The judgment stands, leaving the insurance company’s denial of benefits in effect. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.