Subscribe: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Disability Insurance Legal News
http://feeds.feedburner.com/DisabilityInsuranceLegalNews
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
benefits  claimant  court  disability insurer  disability  dist lexis  federal judge  federal  insurer  judge  lexis  plan 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Disability Insurance Legal News

LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Disability Insurance Legal News



Headline Disability Insurance Legal News from LexisNexis®



 



Plan Administrator Abused Its Discretion In Terminating Benefits, 4th Circuit Affirms
RICHMOND, Va. - The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 5 said a district court did not improperly find that a disability plan administrator abused its discretion in terminating a claimant's benefits because the evidence supports a finding that the claimant was disabled and the plan administrator's decision was not reasoned and principled (Stephen Wilkinson v. Sun Life and Health Insurance Co., et al., No. 15-2105, 4th Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 201).



Insurer Did Not Abuse Discretion In Terminating LTD Benefits, Judge Says
SHERMAN, Texas - A disability insurer did not abuse its discretion in terminating a claimant's long-term disability (LTD) benefits because the evidence supported the termination, a Texas federal judge said Dec. 12, noting that the insurer conducted an independent medical exam and four independent peer reviews before terminating benefits (Martha Shindoll v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co., No. 15-759, E.D. Texas; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171166).



7th Circuit Panel Finds Benefits Termination Was Not Arbitrary And Capricious
CHICAGO - A disability insurer's termination of benefits was not arbitrary and capricious because the evidence supported the termination and the insurer minimized any conflict of interest by employing a number of safeguards, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Jan. 6 (Donna Geiger v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., No. 16-2790, 7th Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 245).



Claimant Did Not Qualify For Benefits Pursuant To Disability Plan's Terms
PITTSBURGH - A Pennsylvania federal judge on Dec. 28 dismissed two disability insurers from a suit filed by a disability claimant after determining that the insurers' denial of benefits was not unreasonable because the claimant did not qualify for benefits pursuant to the plan's terms (Ronald P. Boyles Jr. v. American Heritage Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 15-274, W.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179063).



North Carolina Federal Judge Says Claimant's Disability Benefits Must Be Reinstated
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Because a disability insurer did not rebut a claimant's medical evidence with its own substantial evidence, terminating the claimant's disability benefits was not reasonable and the claimant's benefits must be reinstated, a North Carolina federal judge said Dec. 27 (Joseline Montero v. Bank of America Long-Term Disability Plan, et al,, No. 15-519, W.D. N.C.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178724).



Termination Of Benefits Was Arbitrary And Capricious, 6th Circuit Majority Says
CINCINNATI - The majority of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 15 determined that a disability plan administrator acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it terminated a claimant's benefits because the objective medical evidence did not support the administrator's decision (Jack B. Calhoun Jr. v. Life Insurance Company of North America, No. 15-3470, 6th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22426).



Appeals Panel Says Evidence Supports Insurer's Denial Of Disability Benefits
SAN FRANCISCO - The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 23 affirmed a district court's ruling that a disability insurer's denial of benefits was reasonable after determining that the evidence does not support the contention that the claimant was permanently disabled (Fred Arko v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Co., No. 14-17287, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23207).



California Federal Judge Sets Bench Trial In Suit Seeking Disability Benefits
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Dec. 9 scheduled a bench trial in a disability benefits dispute after determining that it is not clear from the available evidence whether a claimant's prior disability claims factored into the insurer's decision to deny a third disability claim (Robert Bosley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 16-139, N.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170872).



Washington Federal Judge: Discretionary Clause Is Not Enforceable In Washington
TACOMA, Wash. - A Washington federal judge on Dec. 22 refused to enforce a disability plan's discretionary clause on the basis that enforcement of the clause would violate a strong public policy in the state of Washington (Anthony Flaaen v. Principal Life Insurance Co. Inc., No. 15-5899, W.D. Wash.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177638).



California Federal Judge Adopts Insurer's Interpretation Of Elimination Period
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal judge on Dec. 19 determined that a disability claimant's brief return to part-time work does not extend the end of the plan's elimination period for benefits because the claimant's attempt to work in a part-time capacity only bolsters the conclusion that the claimant was still disabled when he returned to part-time work (Marlon Montoya v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., No. 14-2740, N.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175208).



Offset Is Based On Amount 'Payable' To Claimant, 1st Circuit Panel Says
BOSTON - The First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 16 affirmed that a disability administrator is not required to calculate an offset based on the amount of benefits received after taxes are taken from the claimant's Social Security disability payments, noting that the plan specifically states that the offset is based on the amount "payable" to the claimant (Debra Troiano v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 16-1307, 1st Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22404).



Negligence Claim Completely Preempted By ERISA, 6th Circuit Panel Affirms
CINCINNATI - Dismissal of a negligence suit filed against a company hired to review a disability claimant's medical records was proper because the negligence claim is completely preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Dec. 22 (Samantha Milby v. MCMC LLC, No. 16-5483, 6th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23112).



Claimant's Suit Is Time- Barred Under Disability Policy, Appeals Panel Says
NEW ORLEANS - A disability claimant's suit is time-barred under the terms of the policy at issue because the claimant failed to file the suit within three years of the date when written proof of loss was required under the policy, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Dec. 13 (Woodrow K. Wilson v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance Co., No. 16-30305, 5th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 22143).



Plan Defendants Maintain They Are Not Required To Adopt SSA's Onset Date
RICHMOND, Va. - A disability plan and its administrator are not required to adopt the disability onset date determined by the Social Security Administration (SSA), the plan defendants argue in a Dec. 19 reply brief filed in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, maintaining that a district court erred in finding that the plan defendants are bound by the SSA's disability onset date (Jesse Solomon v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, et al., No. 16-1730, 4th Cir.).



Plan Administrator Did Not Abuse Discretion In Denying Claim, 9th Circuit Says
SAN FRANCISCO - A plan administrator did not abuse its discretion in denying a claim for disability pension benefits because the denial was reasonable based on the evidence and the terms of the plan, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Dec. 23 (Eun Sug Cha v. 1199SEIU Health Care Employees Pension Fund, No. 15-55435, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23235).



Federal Magistrate Grants Motion To Keep Insurer's Trade Secrets Confidential
OWENSBORO, Ky. - A Kentucky federal magistrate judge on Dec. 14 granted a disability insurer's motion for a protective order of confidentiality, finding that the information it wants to keep confidential qualifies as trade secrets because a competitor could gain an advantage over the insurer if it had access to the information (Paulette Owens v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, No. 4:15-cv-00071, W.D. Ky.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172540).



Evidence Shows Claimant Is Not Disabled From Any Occupation, Panel Affirms
CINCINNATI - Because six medical experts unanimously agreed that a disability claimant was not disabled from performing any occupation, the disability insurer did not act arbitrarily and capriciously in terminating the claimant's long-term disability (LTD) benefits, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Nov. 29 (Dana Leppert v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, No. 16-3387, 6th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 21438).



Termination Of Benefits Under Any-Occupation Standard Was Reasonable, Judge Says
ATHENS, Ga. - A disability insurer's termination of a claimant's long-term disability (LTD) benefits based on the conclusion that the claimant was not disabled from any occupation was not arbitrary and capricious because the insurer's termination was supported by substantial medical evidence, a Georgia federal judge concluded Nov. 10 in granting the insurer's motion for judgment on the administrative record (William David Hallman v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, et al., No. 15-49, M.D. Ga.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156027).



Dismissal Of Claimant's Declaratory Judgment Claim Is Premature, Judge Says
TAMPA, Fla. - Dismissal of a disability claimant's declaratory judgment claim against a disability insurer is premature, a Florida federal judge said Nov. 14 in denying the insurer's motion to dismiss the claim (Frederick A. Hauber v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co., No. 16-2101, M.D. Fla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 156913).



Termination Of Benefits Supported By Evidence, Texas Federal Judge Says
BEAUMONT, Texas - A federal magistrate judge correctly found that a disability insurer's termination of disability benefits was not an abuse of discretion, a Texas federal judge said Dec. 6, noting that the evidence clearly supports the insurer's decision (Troy Arrington v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, et al., No. 14-549, E.D. Texas; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168120).



Insurer Not Required To Complete Independent Medical Exam, Judge Says
LAFAYETTE, La. - A disability insurer did not abuse its discretion in denying a claim for long-term disability benefits because the insurer was not required to complete an independent medical exam of the claimant and was not required to give greater weight to the opinions of the claimant's treating physicians, a Louisiana federal judge said Dec. 5 (Linda Bellard v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America, No. 15-0428, W.D. La.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 167714).



Termination Of Benefits Was Not Abuse Of Discretion, Federal Judge Says
LOS ANGELES - A California federal judge on Nov. 30 determined that a disability insurer did not abuse its discretion when it terminated a claimant's short-term disability benefits because the insurer's termination was based on reliable evidence (Greg Martin v. Aetna Life Insurance Co. et al., No. 15-7355, C.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166120).



New York Federal Judge Remands Disability Case To Aetna Life Insurance
ROCHESTER, N.Y. - A New York federal judge in an opinion filed Nov. 18 granted partial summary judgment to a man whose long-term disability claims were denied, saying that the defendants failed to adequately explain all of the reasons for denying the claim in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Charles Standish v. Federal Express Corp. Long Term Disability Plan, et al., No. 6:15-cv-6226, W.D. N.Y.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160093).



Insurer Entitled To Accept Opinions Of Its Physicians, Wisconsin Federal Judge Says
MADISON, Wis. - A Wisconsin judge on Nov. 14 determined that a disability insurer did not act arbitrarily and capriciously when it terminated a claimant's long-term disability (LTD) benefits because the insurer was not required to give more weight to the opinions of the claimant's treating physicians than to the insurer's reviewing physicians (Kathy J. Jacowski v. Kraft Heinz Foods Co., et al., No. 15-657, W.D. Wis.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157360).



Kentucky Panel Dismisses Appeal, Says Ruling Was Not Final, Appealable Order
FRANKFORT, Ky. - The Kentucky Court of Appeals on Nov. 23 dismissed a disability claimant's appeal of a trial court's decision to set aside a default judgment entered against a disability insurer because the trial court's ruling on the default judgment was not a final, appealable order (Alanya Hoppius v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 2014-CA-001199, Ky. App.; 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 792).



Suit Against Insurer, Former Employer Dismissed For Failure To State Claim
DAYTON, Ohio - An Ohio federal judge on Nov. 14 dismissed a disability claimant's suit against her former employer and its disability insurer after determining that the claimant's suit failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted (Charlotte S. Thomas v. Progressive Casualty Insurance Co., et al., No. 15-456, S.D. Ohio; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157447).



Administrator Correctly Interpreted Terms Of Plan, Arkansas Federal Judge Says
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - A plan administrator did not abuse its discretion in denying a claim for disability pension benefits, an Arkansas federal judge said Dec. 1 after determining that the plan correctly interpreted the terms of the policy and reasonably applied its interpretation when denying the claim for benefits (Derrick Jones v. Kohler Co. Pension Plan, No. 14-83, E.D. Ark.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165611).



Trust Did Not Have The Authority To Make Claims Decisions, Ky. Panel Says
FRANKFORT, Ky. - The Kentucky Court of Appeals on Dec. 2 affirmed the dismissal of two disability claimants' amended complaints after finding that the claimants could not assert their claims against the trust that administered their employer's disability plan because the trust did not possess the authority to determine a claimant's eligibility for benefits (Vera Furtula v. PNC Bank et al., Nos. 2015-518, 2015-525, Ky. App.; 2016 Ky. App. Unpub. LEXIS 801).



Kentucky Federal Judge Says Breach Of Fiduciary Duty Claim Must Be Dismissed
LOUISVILLE, Ky. - A Kentucky federal judge on Nov. 14 granted a disability insurer's motion for partial summary judgment on a plaintiff's claims for breach of fiduciary duty because the claimant did not prove that there was an injury separate and distinct from the denial of disability benefits (Samantha Milby v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, No. 13-487, W.D. Ky.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157116).



Pension Rights Center Urges High Court To Review Issue Of Forum-Selection Clauses
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an amicus curiae brief filed on Dec. 2 in the U.S. Supreme Court, the Pension Rights Center urges the high court to review a decision by the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that enforced a disability plan's forum-selection clause, arguing that the allowance of forum-selection clauses in disability plans does not provide plan participants with ready access to federal courts and forces participants to sue in a court chosen by a plan (Lorna Clause v. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, et al., No. 16-641, U.S. Sup.; 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 4420; 2016 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 4114).



Consent To Removal Was Necessary, Michigan Federal Judge Says In Remanding Suit
DETROIT - A Michigan federal judge on Nov. 15 remanded a disability claimant's suit to Michigan state court after determining that an auto insurer's consent to the disability insurer's notice of removal was required in order for the suit to remain in federal court (Pearlie Askew v. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Co., et al., No. 16-12130, E.D. Mich.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157595).



Maryland Federal Judge Defers Ruling On Claimant's Motion For Attorney Fees, Costs
BALTIMORE - A Maryland federal judge on Nov. 15 entered an order deferring a ruling on a disability claimant's motion for attorney fees and costs until an appeal filed by the plan defendants in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals regarding the claimant's disability onset date is decided (Jesse Solomon v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, et al., No. 14-3570, D. Md.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 157606).



Evidence Shows Claimant Not Able To Work In Sedentary Position, Panel Says
SAN FRANCISCO - A district court erred in determining that a disability claimant was capable of working in a sedentary position because the evidence shows that the claimant was able to sit for only four hours in an eight-hour workday, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Nov. 4 (Avery Armani v. Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co., No. 14-56866, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19925).



Claimant Capable Of Working In Sedentary Position, Panel Affirms
ATLANTA - A district court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of an employer and a disability insurer because the evidence supported the disability insurer's conclusion that the disability claimant was capable of working in a sedentary position, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 21 (Andrew Ramdeen v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, et al., No. 16-11179, 11th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18962).



Evidence Supports Finding That Claimant Could Perform Duties Of Usual Occupation
SAN FRANCISCO - A district court did not err in concluding that a disability claimant was not totally disabled by fibromyalgia because the evidence supports the insurer's determination that the claimant could perform the material and substantial duties of her usual occupation, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 26 (Cheryl Leslie v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co., No. 14-56775, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19348).



Termination Of Benefits Was Reasonable, Majority Of 9th Circuit Panel Determines
SAN FRANCISCO - The majority of a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Oct. 28 denied a disability claimant's motion for rehearing and reiterated that the termination of the claimant's benefits was reasonable because the claimant did not undergo an independent medical exam as requested by the insurer and as required under the plan (Curtis F. Lee v. ING Groep, N.V., et al., No. 14-15848, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 19513).



Denial Of Benefits Was Reasonable Based On Evidence, 6th Circuit Panel Says
CINCINNATI - A disability insurer's denial of long-term disability benefits was reasonable based on the substantial amount of evidence showing that the claimant was not disabled until after he was no longer covered under the disability plan at issue, the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 4 (James J. Connelly v. Standard Insurance Co., No. 16-3036, 6th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18214).



Insurer's Termination Of Benefits Supported By Evidence, Federal Judge Says
HARRISBURG, Pa. - A disability insurer's termination of a claimant's benefits was not unreasonable because the evidence supports the insurer's conclusion that the claimant was not disabled after her discharge from an inpatient program at a mental health facility, a Pennsylvania federal judge said Oct. 17 (Cheryl Gailey v. Life Insurance Company of North America, No. 15-564, M.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143110).



Termination Of Benefits Supported By Medical Evidence, Federal Judge Says
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. - The termination of a claimant's long-term disability (LTD) benefits was reasonable based on the evidence considered by the disability plan prior to terminating benefits, an Arkansas federal judge said Oct. 7 (Evelyn Thompson v. ConAgra Foods Inc., et al., No. 14-41, E.D. Ark.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140149).



Mississippi Federal Judge: Request To Reopen Disability Benefits Suit Is Premature
OXFORD, Miss. - A Mississippi federal judge on Oct. 26 denied a former National Football League (NFL) player's request to reopen his disability benefits case on the basis that the request is premature because the plan administrator has yet to render a final decision on his claim (Christopher Hudson v. Retirement Board, as the administrator of the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, No. 15-128, N.D. Miss.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151115).



Monthly Benefits Payable Based On Most Current Benefit Increase, Federal Judge Says
WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. - A North Carolina federal judge on Oct. 6 rejected a disability insurer's argument that a monthly disability benefit should be based on the last benefit increase accepted by the insured before the disability claim and said the claimant is entitled to the current monthly benefit payable under the policy (Jessica Slice-Sadler v. Principal Life Insurance Co., No. 15-216, M.D. N.C.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138990).



Insurer's Termination Of Long-Term Care Benefits Was Correct, Federal Judge Says
TAMPA, Fla. - A disability insurer correctly determined that a claimant was no longer eligible for long-term care disability benefits because it is clear from the evidence that the claimant no longer qualified for benefits under the policy's cognitive-impairment or functional-disability provisions, a Florida federal judge said Oct. 17 (David Carr v. John Hancock Life Insurance Co. [USA], No. 14-2867, M.D. Fla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143050).



Plan Defendants Argue Plan Is Not Bound By SSA's Disability Onset Date
RICHMOND, Va. - A district court misinterpreted a disability plan's provisions when it determined that the plan and its administrator are bound by the disability onset date determined by the Social Security Administration (SSA), the plan defendants argue in a Nov. 2 brief filed in the Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Jesse Solomon v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, et al., No. 16-1730, 4th Cir.).



Complaint Seeks Finding That Insurer Wrongfully Offset Veterans' Benefits
BOSTON - A U.S. Army veteran filed a class action suit on Oct. 25 in Massachusetts federal court against a disability insurer, alleging that the insurer wrongfully offset disability benefits payable under the insurer's policy by disability benefits received from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs because the policy does not list veterans disability benefits as income eligible for an offset under the policy (Marco Martinez v. Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, No. 16-12154, D. Mass.).



Insurer Is Not Entitled To Collect Attorney Fees, Florida Federal Judge Says
TAMPA, Fla. - A disability insurer is not entitled to collect more than $48,000 in attorney fees against a claimant because the claimant's suit was not frivolous and the claimant was partially successful in his bid to recover disability benefits, a Florida federal judge said Oct. 20 (Kristian Horneland v. United of Omaha Life Insurance Co., No. 15-1703, M.D. Fla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145405).



Information About Medical Reviewers Is Relevant, Kentucky Federal Judge Says
OWENSBORO, Ky. - A Kentucky federal judge on Oct. 21 rejected a disability insurer's objections to a magistrate judge's discovery order and the insurer's motion for a protective order regarding information about the medical reviewers used by the insurer in evaluating a disability claim because the information sought by the claimant is relevant and not unduly burdensome (Paulette Owens v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, No. 15-71, W.D. Ky.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 145941).



Claimant Should Not Be Permitted To Conduct Discovery, Plan Argues
INDIANAPOLIS - A disability claimant should not be permitted to conduct discovery to determine if a plan operated under a conflict of interest because the claimant failed to prove that the discovery sought is necessary, the plan argues in a Nov. 3 response brief filed in Indiana federal court (Donald Fessenden v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 15-370, N.D. Ind.).



Montana Federal Judge Denies Motion To Remand, Says Removal Was Proper
MISSOULA, Mont. - A Montana federal judge on Oct. 11 denied a disability claimant's motion to remand a suit to Montana state court on the basis that jurisdiction in federal court is proper and none of the relevant factors weighs in favor of remanding the suit (Philip Cardan v. New York Life Insurance Co., No. 16-102, D. Mont.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140731).



Diversity Of Citizenship Does Not Exist; Suit Must Be Remanded, Federal Judge Says
LOS ANGELES - Because it is possible for a disability claimant to amend a complaint to plead claims with more particularity against a California doctor who conducted an independent medical exam for the disability insurer and the hospital who employed the doctor, a California federal judge on Oct. 11 said the suit must be remanded to state court as complete diversity of citizenship does not exist (Mayna Chau-Barlow v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Co. et al., No. 16-1694, C.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 140833).



Federal Magistrate Judge Denies Motion To Order IME For Failure To Serve Motion
TAMPA, Fla. - Because a disability plan administrator was not served with a claimant's motion seeking an order requiring the plan administrator to reschedule and videotape an independent medical exam (IME), a Florida federal magistrate judge on Oct. 21 denied the claimant's motion without prejudice and allowed the claimant to refile and serve the motion on the plan administrator (Alexander Stratigos v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, No. 16-2780, M.D. Fla.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146094).