Why Did The Appellant Claim Reliance's Denials Were Arbitrary and Capricious?

In ERISA cases, the appellate review focuses on the administrative record's support for the district court's conclusions, regardless of how it arrives there, suggesting that the historical medical context is relevant but not a basis for reversing the judgment.When her multiple sclerosis (MS) progressed and began to seriously affect her career, the claimant, a vice president of health information services at Integrity Health Care, encountered significant challenges. The claimant applied for long-term disability benefits but was denied by Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company. The insurer explained that the medical evidence was somewhat inconsistent with her diagnoses and, in any case, did not establish a disability. Moreover, Reliance's preferred independent doctor concluded that, with certain accommodations and limitations on her physical exertion, the claimant could maintain a normal work schedule.The claimant then sued Reliance in federal district court under ERISA, arguing that her condition, which does not lend itself to objective evidence, was overlooked by Reliance. She pointed out that the insurer ignored relevant medical evidence, including opinions from multiple doctors who declared her disabled, in favor of its own experts who misunderstood the standard for disability.This is the oral argument in the 11th circuit court of appealsThese public domain recordings are brought to you by Ben Glass Law, a national long term disability and life insurance firm headquartered in Fairfax, VA.By making these recordings into a "podcast," we've made the listening easier for claimants, attorneys and claims adjusters alike. If long term disability or life insurance benefits have been denied, we'd love to review your denial letter and give you a strategy for moving forward. This is a free service and you can go here to begin submitting your denial letter.