• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Has your disability claim been denied or terminated? Call (888) 321-8131 for help!

  • Mail
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
Ortiz Law Firm logo

Ortiz Law Firm | National Disability Law Firm

Ortiz Law Firm is dedicated to helping people recover the disability benefits they deserve. We handle group Long Term Disability (LTD) claims, individual disability insurance policy claims, ERISA disability claims, and Social Security Disability claims.

  • ABOUT US
    • Nick Ortiz
    • Areas We Serve
    • Our Team
    • Our Case Results
    • Client Reviews and Testimonials
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • Long-Term Disability Insurance
      • Administrative Appeals
      • Lawsuits
      • Lump Sum Buyouts/Settlements
      • Frequently Asked Questions
      • Occupations That May Qualify
    • Social Security Disability Claims
      • Initial Applications
      • Appeal a Denial
      • Hearings Before an Administrative Law Judge
      • Frequently Asked Questions
      • Disabling Conditions
  • DISABLING CONDITIONS
  • INSURANCE CARRIERS
    • New York Life Group Benefit Solutions (Formerly Cigna)
    • Lincoln Financial
    • Reliance Standard
    • Prudential
    • The Hartford
    • The Standard
    • MetLife
    • Guardian
    • Unum
    • Insurance Company Tricks And Tactics
  • RESOURCES
    • Appeal a Long-Term Disability Denial
    • Long-Term Disability Buyout Calculator
    • eBooks, Guides, and More
    • Disability Law Blog
    • Video Library
    • Long-Term Disability Glossary
    • Abbreviations in Social Security Disability Claims
  • CONTACT

Home | Archives for Nick Ortiz | Page 19

Nick Ortiz

Bradshaw v. Reliance Standard – Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion Was Misapplied To Claim

In the instant case, Julissa Bradshaw (“Bradshaw”) was a medical biller for Pyramid Healthcare Solutions, Inc. (“Pyramid”). She held a policy through Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company (“Reliance Standard”) for both short-term and long-term disability coverage. Her coverage under this policy began on May 1, 2013. When Bradshaw was hired by Pyramid, she was several weeks into a pregnancy. She …

Read moreBradshaw v. Reliance Standard – Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion Was Misapplied To Claim

Black v. MetLife – Social Media Monitoring Leads To Termination Of Benefits

In this case, the court found that the evidence MetLife received in 2014, and in 2015 after Black appealed MetLife’s initial denial, showed that Black’s physical condition had in fact improved sufficiently to allow her to perform sedentary work

Read moreBlack v. MetLife – Social Media Monitoring Leads To Termination Of Benefits

Bey v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules Reliance Standard Did Not Act Arbitrarily Or Capriciously

The Court found that ERISA preempts Ms. Bey’s state law claims and that Reliance is entitled to summary judgment in its favor in all respects. Given the thorough review by an independent physician, the Court did not conclude that Reliance acted arbitrarily or capriciously.

Read moreBey v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules Reliance Standard Did Not Act Arbitrarily Or Capriciously

Ausler v. Aetna – Court Affirms That Claimants Must Exhaust Appeals to File Suit

In this case, Tiffany Ausler (“Ausler”) worked as a software engineer for Boeing Corporation (“Boeing”). Because she was a Boeing employee, Ausler was covered under both short-term and long-term disability compensation plans where Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”) was the administrator of the plans. The plan brochure explains that an employee may be eligible for short-term disability benefits …

Read moreAusler v. Aetna – Court Affirms That Claimants Must Exhaust Appeals to File Suit

Arning v. Aetna – Court Rules There Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Charles Buford Arning (“Arning”) was employed full-time by ECMD, Inc. as the President of the Arndt & Herman Building Products Division. Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”) administered a Long-Term Disability Executives Plan provided to ECMD employees. The Plan’s language provides: “You will be considered disabled while covered under this . . . Plan on the …

Read moreArning v. Aetna – Court Rules There Was No Abuse Of Discretion

Scott v. Union Security – Court Upholds Denial Of Orthopedic Surgeon’s Claim

In this case, Andrew Scott (“Scott”) was an orthopedic surgeon focusing on sports medicine. His employer had a long-term disability (LTD) plan through Union Security Insurance Company (“Union”). The LTD plan defined “disability” as follows: In October 2012, the Plaintiff had surgery for a rotator cuff injury. As a result, he stopped working as a surgeon. Union then …

Read moreScott v. Union Security – Court Upholds Denial Of Orthopedic Surgeon’s Claim

Usztics v. Unum – Court Finds No Evidence To Support Disability

Susan Usztics (“Usztics”) was employed as a program manager for MSX International, Inc. Through her employment, she held a short-term disability benefits policy which was administered by Unum Life Insurance Company of America (“Unum”). Her last day of work was February 4, 2014, following which she applied for short-term disability benefits because of fibromyalgia, anxiety, and …

Read moreUsztics v. Unum – Court Finds No Evidence To Support Disability

Zerangue v. Lincoln – Case Dismissed Because Claimant Did Not Apply For Benefits

In Zerangue v. Lincoln National, Lena Zerangue (“Zerangue”) filed an ERISA suit against The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company (“Lincoln”) in an attempt to recover long-term disability benefits that she believed she should receive. Because of her employment with Alliance Benefit Partners, Zerangue held policy coverage under both short-term and long-term disability plans. Zerangue pleaded that Lincoln …

Read moreZerangue v. Lincoln – Case Dismissed Because Claimant Did Not Apply For Benefits

Draper v. Aetna – Court Rules That MRI Was Not A Significant Finding

In this case, Christopher Draper (“Draper”) worked as a truck driver/courier for Federal Express Corporation (“Fed Ex”). His job duties included doing things such as “maneuvering packages of any weight above 75 lbs. with appropriate equipment and/or assistance from another person.” This claim arose from a denial of Draper’s short-term disability (STD) benefits which originated …

Read moreDraper v. Aetna – Court Rules That MRI Was Not A Significant Finding

Burkhead v. LINA – Denial Was Arbitrary And Capricious

In Burkhead v. Life Insurance Company of North America, the plaintiff filed for short and long-term disability benefits from Life Insurance Company of North America (LINA), the insurer of her ERISA governed plan. In the District Court’s Opinion, the court held that LINA abused its discretion in denying plaintiff benefits under the “own occupation” standard …

Read moreBurkhead v. LINA – Denial Was Arbitrary And Capricious

Bowman v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules In Favor Of Reliance

Anthony Bowman (“Bowman”) was employed as a Maintenance Mechanic which required the ability to do heavy lifting between fifty and sixty pounds. Injuries throughout his life caused him to have a number of surgeries and resulted in chronic neck and back pain. Bowman also had issues with a sleep disorder and pain medication, which led …

Read moreBowman v. Reliance Standard – Court Rules In Favor Of Reliance

Ampe v. Prudential – Engineer’s Case Remanded For Further Review

This case involves James Ampe (“Ampe”), a Senior Development and Test Engineer employed by MIT Lincoln Laboratories (“MIT”). Ampe’s job duties included not only traditional electrical engineer work, but also regular client interactions. He was employed by the company from 2008 to January 26, 2015. Around August 2011, Ampe injured himself when he fell and …

Read moreAmpe v. Prudential – Engineer’s Case Remanded For Further Review

Foster v. Principal – Court Rules Principal Didn’t Commit An Abuse Of Discretion

In this case, Amanda Foster (“Foster”) worked as an attorney for Sullivan, Stolier & Knight (“Sullivan”) in New Orleans. Her duties involved being able to “review and draft leases and agreements; research and advise clients regarding government laws and regulations; represent clients in administrative appeals; [and] draft compliance plans.” When Foster had been working for …

Read moreFoster v. Principal – Court Rules Principal Didn’t Commit An Abuse Of Discretion

Charles v. UPS and Aetna – Court Rules Denial Of Benefits Was An Abuse Of Discretion

Aetna’s decision to deny the plaintiff benefits was unsupported by substantial evidence and was, thereby arbitrary and capricious. Aetna gave great weight to the opinions of its own experts and afforded little, to no, weight to the plaintiff’s own physicians. Under the circumstances, the plaintiff’s physicians—who had been treating him for several years—would be better able to recommend health and safety conditions than doctors who simply reviewed his medical files.

Read moreCharles v. UPS and Aetna – Court Rules Denial Of Benefits Was An Abuse Of Discretion

Allen v. Unum – Claim Denial Was Not An Abuse Of Discretion

The Court determined that Unum came to a reasonable decision after a principled decision-making process. Although the Court may have reached a different conclusion independently, Unum did not abuse its discretion in denying Allen’s claim for long-term disability benefits.

Read moreAllen v. Unum – Claim Denial Was Not An Abuse Of Discretion

The Hartford Now Owns Aetna’s Long-Term Disability Group Insurance Division

If you have a long-term disability insurance claim that has been managed by Aetna, and now letters are coming to you on letterhead from the Hartford, do not be alarmed. That’s because Hartford entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Aetna’s U.S. group life and disability business in October 2017. This means that Hartford has …

Read moreThe Hartford Now Owns Aetna’s Long-Term Disability Group Insurance Division
  • Previous
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 17
  • Page 18
  • Page 19

Sidebar

Book cover: Top Ten Mistakes That Will DESTROY Your Long-Term Disability Claim

Free e-Book for LTD Claims

Discover the common pitfalls that can derail your long term disability claim.

Get Your Free Book

Our Clients Love Us

They are the best in everything.

Ricardo T.

See All Testimonials

Recent Posts

  • Krueger v. Reliance Standard – Illinois HR Executive Wins LTD Lawsuit Over Misapplied Pre-Existing Condition Exclusion
  • Ziegler v. Sun Life – Court Upholds Denial of Disability Benefits for Missouri Ophthalmic Technician
  • Halleron v. Reliance Standard – Baptist Healthcare Physician’s LTD Claim Sent Back for Full Review After Flawed Denial
  • Ortiz Law Firm Helps Client Recover Denied LTD Benefits After Cardiac Arrest and Brain Injury
  • Ward v. Reliance Standard – Maryland Engineer Wins Long-Term Disability Lawsuit

Contact Us

Ortiz Law Firm is a national disability law firm specializing in long-term disability appeals, disability insurance lawsuits, and Social Security Disability claims. Contact us for a free case review.

(888) 321-8131
316 S Baylen St., Ste 590,
Pensacola, FL 32502

  • Mail
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube

Claims We Handle

  • Group Long-Term Disability
  • ERISA Disability Claims
  • Individual Disability Insurance
  • Social Security Disability Claims
  • Long-Term Care Insurance

Quick Links

  • About Us
  • Nick Ortiz
  • Free Resources
  • Video Library
  • Client Testimonials
  • Successful LTD Appeals
  • Nationwide Representation
  • Refer a Case

Our Pensacola Office


Sitemap | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2025 | Ortiz Law Firm | All Rights Reserved