How to File a Hartford Life Insurance Policy Lawsuit
A recent case involving a Hartford Life insurance policy was Davis v. Hartford Life and Accident Life Insurance Co. The case involved a disgorgement claim and breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs alleged that Hartford Life failed to honor their contracts and owed them a fiduciary duty. They also claimed breach of contract under SS 1332(a)(3). Here’s an overview of how to file a lawsuit under these circumstances.
Davis v. Hartford Life & Accident Life Insurance Co.
The court held that Hartford’s denial of Davis’s application for a waiver of life insurance premiums did not reflect a blatant abuse of discretion. The insurance company also did not provide substantial evidence to support its decision that Davis was not disabled. The court affirmed the denial but set out several conditions for a new trial. This case provides important lessons for life insurance companies.
In 2011, the plaintiff, Richard Davis, filed a claim for LTD benefits from Hartford. He claimed to be disabled due to multiple myeloma. Hartford initially approved the claim, but later terminated his benefits after reviewing his medical records. After exhausting all administrative remedies, Davis sued Hartford in federal court in Kentucky. In this case, the plaintiff argued that Hartford had violated the terms of the LTD plan, breach of contract, and fiduciary duty under SS 1332(a)(3) and 1132(a)(1).
Hartford Life sued for breach of contract
A plaintiff in a Hartford Life Insurance Policy lawsuit for breach of contract argued that his insurer’s refusal to waive his premiums was unreasonable and violated state law. Specifically, Hartford refused to grant coverage because he failed to identify the specific policy provision he relied upon. In response, the plaintiff filed suit to void the policy. The court rejected the plaintiff’s complaint because he failed to identify any specific policy provision.
In February 2009, Ms. Spiller filed suit in Massachusetts Superior Court. The Hartford Life Insurance Policy lawsuit alleged that the insurer had failed to honor her contract with BB&T. The analyst was diagnosed with cervical degenerative disc disease and suffered from migraine headaches, preventing her from performing the essential duties of her job. Although Hartford initially agreed to reimburse the benefits, they reversed that decision when they discovered the analyst could perform her job in the future. The analyst then sought legal representation.
Hartford Life sued for breach of fiduciary under SS 1332(a)(3)
In a recent court decision, the Second Circuit affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of a Hartford Life Insurance Policy lawsuit based on the arbitrary and capricious standard for the company’s actions. The court rejected the Defendant’s argument that it had discretionary authority to decide whether a beneficiary is eligible for benefits. The standard applies only if a party’s behavior is disproportionate to the prevailing interest.
In the case at hand, Sheila Vaught was an employee of DaVita Inc., an employer that had an employee benefit plan administered by the Hartford Life Accident Insurance Company. Davis filed a claim for LTD benefits in 2011 and Hartford Life approved it. However, after reviewing his medical records, the company terminated his benefits. After exhausting administrative remedies, Davis filed a lawsuit in federal court in Kentucky. She sued the plan on two counts: breach of contract to recover benefits and breach of fiduciary duty under SS 1332(a)(3) and disgorgement under SS 1132(a)(1).
Hartford Life sued for disgorgement under SS 1132(a)(1)
Plaintiff Richard Davis was an employee of U.S. Bank, a company that insured his group LTD plan. The insurance company was Hartford Life & Accident Life Insurance Company. Hartford acknowledges that it has the power to grant benefits or deny them and that it has a fiduciary duty to the plaintiff. Hartford failed to disclose this fact to Davis, and he sued for disgorgement.
The plaintiff asserts that Hartford failed to disclose the fact that she was ineligible for LTD benefits, and that the insurance company did not exercise due diligence in evaluating her medical records. Hartford initially approved Davis’ claim, but later terminated it after reviewing her medical records. Since Davis had exhausted administrative remedies, she sought disgorgement under SS 1132(a)(1) and filed a lawsuit in federal court in Kentucky