Posted on October 18, 2009

A federal judge in Pennsylvania hammered met life for his disability insurance determination.  The Court of Justice, that is clear of the insured doctors disability opinion and is based on a long term doctor-patient relationship, according to not test medical opinion premised on records you alone is questionable and suggest that the insurer is looking for a reason to deny benefits.

Here is that the Court was a justification for her degree to give the applicant a sedentary job was working not very critical met life and your doctor, and the Court of Justice noted that MetLife the doctor ignored a functional capacity evaluation, which supports the claim.  The Court was also critical of the fact that the review ignored doctors of plaintiff's job requirements, and only knew that the job "settled".

In this case was Kauffman versus MetLife and September 24, 2009 was decided.

back to top

Note: You should do your own research. This case is shown here only for your interest and information. Legal research should be done by an experienced attorney. Ben glass recommends that you with an experienced, certified speak lawyer Board in your area to your specific case.

View the original article here