• Menu
  • Skip to right header navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Before Header

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

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube

OLF Ortiz Law Firm National Disability Attorneys

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
    • Our Team
    • Case Results
    • Testimonials
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • Long Term Disability
      • Long Term Disability Appeals
      • Long Term Disability Lawsuits
      • Lump Sum Buyouts/Settlements
    • ERISA Disability Claims
    • Individual Disability Insurance
    • Social Security Disability Claims
      • Initial Applications for Social Security Disability
      • Request for Reconsideration
      • Hearing Before an Administrative Law Judge
    • Long Term Care Insurance Claims
    • Personal Injury Claims
  • DISABLING CONDITIONS
    • Long Term Disability
    • Social Security Disability
  • INSURANCE CARRIERS
    • View All
    • Insurance Company Tricks And Tactics
  • RESOURCES
    • Blog
    • eBooks, Guides, and More
    • Lump Sum Disability Buyout Calculator
    • Long Term Disability FAQs
    • Social Security Disability FAQs
    • Long Term Disability Glossary
    • Individual Disability Insurance Policy Analysis
    • Long Term Disability Federal Court Case Summaries
    • Abbreviations in Social Security Disability Claims
  • Search
  • CONTACT

Mobile Menu

Call us today for help!

(888) 321-8131
  • ABOUT US
    • Nick Ortiz
    • Our Team
    • Case Results
    • Testimonials
  • PRACTICE AREAS
    • Long Term Disability
      • Long Term Disability Appeals
      • Long Term Disability Lawsuits
      • Lump Sum Buyouts/Settlements
    • ERISA Disability Claims
    • Individual Disability Insurance
    • Social Security Disability Claims
      • Initial Applications for Social Security Disability
      • Request for Reconsideration
      • Hearing Before an Administrative Law Judge
    • Long Term Care Insurance Claims
    • Personal Injury Claims
  • DISABLING CONDITIONS
    • Long Term Disability
    • Social Security Disability
  • INSURANCE CARRIERS
    • View All
    • Insurance Company Tricks And Tactics
  • RESOURCES
    • Blog
    • eBooks, Guides, and More
    • Lump Sum Disability Buyout Calculator
    • Long Term Disability FAQs
    • Social Security Disability FAQs
    • Long Term Disability Glossary
    • Individual Disability Insurance Policy Analysis
    • Long Term Disability Federal Court Case Summaries
    • Abbreviations in Social Security Disability Claims
  • Search
  • CONTACT
You are here: Home / Case Summary Blog / Nagy v. Hartford – Court Holds That Hartford Was Proper in Denying Benefits

Nagy v. Hartford – Court Holds That Hartford Was Proper in Denying Benefits

April 22, 2020 //  by Ortiz Law Firm//  Leave a Comment

In the present case, Dave Nagy (“Nagy”) was a Quality Assurance Analyst employed by Oracle America, Inc. (“Oracle”). Around September 8, 2011, he began experiencing symptoms of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS) as well as other mental health and possibly autonomic dysfunctions. Nagy applied for short term disability (STD) benefits but was denied by Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, et al. (“Hartford”), the policymaker. However, the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board reversed that decision and Nagy received STD benefits through September of 2012.

Subsequently, Nagy applied for long term disability (LTD) benefits which Hartford again denied. Nagy appealed and Hartford denied the same. Nagy filed suit on January 3, 2014, and the Court eventually granted Nagy an award of benefits extending from December 12, 2011, to December 11, 2013. The Court then directed Hartford to determine whether Nagy was entitled to LTD benefits beyond that date. Hartford again denied Nagy’s benefits. As a result, the instant suit was filed.

Oracle’s insurance plan defines “Total Disability” as “during the Elimination Period and for the next 24 month(s), as a result of injury or sickness, You are unable to perform with reasonable continuity the Essential Duties necessary to pursue Your occupation in the usual or customary way.” Further, “Your occupation” means “any employment, business, trade or profession and the substantial and material acts of the occupation You were regularly performing for Your employer when the disability began.” After the twenty-four month period, the definition of disability changes from “Your occupation” to “Any Occupation.” Any Occupation is “an occupation You could reasonably be expected to perform satisfactorily in light of Your age, education, training, experience, station in life, and physical and mental capacity.

On June 17, 2016, Nagy supplied Hartford with the information that he was being treated by a number of physicians: Dr. William Early, since January 2012; Dr. Anne Todd, since September 2014; and Dr. Mark B. Van Deusen in February 2016. Nagy further indicated that he had appointments to see Dr. Jose Montoya in June of 2016 and could see Dr. Christopher R. Snell, Ph.D. in 2016. Hartford chose to have medical peer reviews by Neuropsychologist Cynthia Bailey, Ph.D., Occupational Medicine doctor Joseph Rea, M.D., and Infectious Disease doctor Imad Durra, M.D.

Upon review of Nagy’s records, Dr. Bailey did not find any evidence of psychological or cognitive conditions that were functionally impairing. She opined that Nagy’s cognitive weakness was the result of anxiety and depression. As a result, she stated that he was able to work eight hours a day, forty hours a week from December 12, 2013, to the present.

Dr. Joseph Rea’s review of the records indicated that there was no support for any restriction or limitation, except that of a note for safety regarding dizziness. He attempted to reach Dr. Montoya on seven different occasions but was unable to get a response. After reviewing Dr. Christopher Snell’s report, he opined that Nagy should have a minor restriction or limitation regarding full-time sedentary work. However, he could “push, pull, lift, or carry up to 10 pounds on an occasional basis; to stand for up to 20 minutes at a time for up to a total of three hours over an eight-hour period of time; to walk for 15 minutes at a time for up to two hours over an eight-hour period of time; and to avoid larger truncal or leg actions, such as crouching, crawling, or squatting.” Additionally, “there would be no obvious limitation in regard to sitting, reaching, or the use of hands, while any climbing or kneeling should be limited to a rare or less than occasional frequency.”

After reviewing Nagy’s records, Dr. Imad Durra stated that Nagy’s diagnoses were previously identified as obstructive sleep apnea, restless leg syndrome, anxiety, GERD, and depression. He also found no potential limitations or restrictions related to infectious disease. Dr. Durra opined that he was unable to make a determination regarding chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalitis without ruling out other causes first.

Hartford then conducted a Vocational Review based on the restrictions and limitations in Nagy’s medical records. The report showed that there were sixteen occupations in the “closest” level, which were crossed with Nagy’s functional capabilities, education, skills, and earning potential.  Several of those positions were located in the area where Nagy resided.

Nagy also provided a statement of what his typical day looked like. For example, he provided the following as an explanation of the types of things he would do: “[…] household chores. Maybe I’ll go to the store and buy groceries. Maybe I’ll vacuum either the upstairs or downstairs. Maybe I’ll mow one of the lawns. Perhaps I’ll take our tortoise out for a walk. Last week, I needed to drive my Wife into Atlanta for a doctor’s appointment, so that turned out to be the only thing I accomplished on that day.”

As a result of the above, Hartford alleges that Nagy is unable to prove that he had a continuous disability throughout the “Any Occupation” period from December 12, 2013, to the present. More specifically, Hartford contends that there is a lack of disability certification from Nagy’s physicians, that the reviewing physicians agree that Nagy can perform sedentary work and that Nagy has a record of failing to comply with his physicians’ treatment recommendations. Nagy argued that his medical records showed that he could not return to sedentary work. However, there is a ten-month gap in the treatment record that is unaccounted for. As such, he failed to show a continuous disability throughout the “Any Occupation” period. Further, Nagy’s own statement showed that he would be capable of performing sedentary work. Additionally, Nagy failed to follow recommendations by his treating physicians. Dr. Todd suggested that Nagy commits to a gentle exercise routine, which he did not do. Dr. Todd also noted that Nagy failed to regularly take his prescribed medication.

One of Nagy’s final arguments was that none of the sixteen employers that Hartford identified would hire him. However, Hartford’s only requirement was to show that there are opportunities, not to show that Nagy would necessarily be hired. Because Nagy failed to prove his burden that he was continuously disabled during the “Any Occupation” period, the court held that Hartford was proper in denying his benefits.

[Note: this claim was not handled by the Ortiz Law Firm. It is merely summarized here for a better understanding of how Federal Courts are handling long term disability insurance claims.]

Here is a PDF copy of the decision: Nagy v. Hartford

FacebookTweetPinLinkedInPrintEmail

Category: Case Summary Blog, Long Term DisabilityTag: Hartford

Recent Posts

  • How to Win a Long Term Disability Appeal: Do’s and Don’ts
  • 3 Steps You Must Take Right Now If Your LTD Benefits Are Terminated!
  • Leveraging the Grid Rules to Secure SSDI Benefits After Age 50
  • What Is an On-The-Record Decision in a Social Security Disability Claim?
  • Understanding the Difference Between Diagnosis and Functional Impairment in Long Term Disability Claims
Previous Post: « Murphy v. Aetna – Claim Terminated Under the Any Occupation Standard
Next Post: There Are Not More People Going On Disability Than Getting Jobs »

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Primary Sidebar

Top Ten Mistakes That Will Destroy Your Long Term Disability Claim

View All Resources

"I highly recommend Ortiz Law Firm. Very friendly staff. They helped me win my appeal against Liberty Mutual. Thank you all for being the best!!"

Lavanda T.

View All Testimonials

Learn More About Long Term Disability

  • Areas We Serve
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Denials and Appeals
  • Your Chances of Getting Approved
  • Medical Eligibility
  • Additional Parts That Do Not Happen in Every Case
  • Medical Conditions That May Qualify
  • Long Term Disability Insurance Carriers
  • Occupations That May Qualify
  • LTD Federal Court Case Summaries

Footer

Contact Us

Our experienced disability law firm is ready to fight for you. Contact us today for a free case evaluation.

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

  • Email
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube

Claims We Handle

  • Group Long Term Disability
  • ERISA Disability Claims
  • Individual Disability Insurance
  • Social Security Disability Claims
  • Long Term Care Insurance
  • Florida Personal Injury

Quick Links

  • About Us
  • Free Resources
  • Client Testimonials
  • Case Results
  • Nationwide Representation
  • Refer a Case

Site Footer

© 2023 Ortiz Law Firm

Sitemap | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!