Receive the latest news.
Posted on October 18, 2009

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

Here is, that the Court was very critical to give a justification for her degree met life and his doctor for the failure to comply with, that the applicant could work a sedentary job, and the Court of Justice noted that the MetLife a functional capacity evaluation ignored doctor, which supports the claim.  The Court was also critical that the review ignored doctors of the plaintiff's job requirements and only knew that the task "settled".

In this case was Kauffman to 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