{"id":14809,"date":"2019-01-03T12:03:56","date_gmt":"2019-01-03T16:03:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.disabilitylawblog.com\/?p=3200"},"modified":"2019-01-03T12:03:56","modified_gmt":"2019-01-03T16:03:56","slug":"reliance-ordered-to-pay-back-ltd-benefits-to-2013-using-66830-salary-plus-58740-00-in-legal-fees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/2019\/01\/03\/reliance-ordered-to-pay-back-ltd-benefits-to-2013-using-66830-salary-plus-58740-00-in-legal-fees\/","title":{"rendered":"Reliance Ordered to Pay Back LTD Benefits to 2013, Using $66,830 Salary, Plus $58,740.00 in Legal Fees"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>In the case of <em>Cheryl L. Wallace v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.<\/em>, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, previously held that \u201cthe administrative record undisputedly reflects that Plaintiff is totally disabled and entitled to LTD benefits under Reliance\u2019s plan.\u201d In the earlier case, the Court also ordered Reliance to pay Plaintiff\u2019s legal fees and also ordered for the parties to meet and try to settle the case between them.<br \/><span id=\"more-3200\"><\/span><br \/>When the attorneys could not agree on how to calculate the amount due Plaintiff for her back long-term disability (LTD) benefits, the Court stepped in and determined how benefits should be calculated. The Court also awarded attorney\u2019s fees and costs.<\/p>\n<h2>Determination of Amount of Back-Due LTD Benefits<\/h2>\n<p>The Court calculated Plaintiff\u2019s salary for both the time she could not work in her own occupation and, over Reliance\u2019s objection, also held the \u201crecord undisputedly reflects Plaintiff\u2019s inability to work, period.\u201d Her disability was due to her immunosuppressed state and she was not expected to recover. So, the Court\u2019s calculation included LTD benefits to which she was also entitled due to her inability to work in any occupation in addition to the time she was disabled from working in her own occupation.<\/p>\n<p>Over Reliance\u2019s objection, the Court ordered benefits to be calculated on the following terms:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Plaintiff\u2019s annual salary at the time of her disability was $68,830.40 and that is the figure Reliance must use in determining her benefit of \u201c60 percent of her covered monthly earnings.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Plaintiff was owed benefits back to May 2013 when she became disabled.<\/li>\n<li>Plaintiff was entitled to prejudgment interest on back benefits \u201cto compensate Plaintiff for the wrongful deprivation of her monthly disability benefits since May 2013.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Plaintiff was entitled to post-judgment interest \u201cas mandated by statute.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2>Plaintiff Also Entitled to Attorney\u2019s Fees and Costs<\/h2>\n<p>The Court also held that Plaintiff was entitled to attorney\u2019s fees and costs in the amount of $58,740.00 and costs of $3,861.76. The Court considered five factors set forth in Sixth Circuit precedent and found that Plaintiff:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Achieved success on the merits.<\/li>\n<li>Reliance had the ability to pay the award.<\/li>\n<li>The award may deter other plan administrators from \u201cdenying benefits based on reasons unsupported by the facts or plan language and from engaging in conduct to prolong litigation and the payment of those benefits.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>Plaintiff prevailed on the dispositive issue of the case and Reliance\u2019s \u201crationale for denying her LTD benefits had little merit.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Although the Plaintiff sought to vindicate only her own rights, and did not raise any significant legal questions regarding ERISA, since four factors weighed in her favor, the Court used its discretion and ordered Reliance to pay reasonable attorney\u2019s fees and costs.<\/p>\n<h2>Fees and Costs Were Reasonable<\/h2>\n<p>The Court noted that \u201cA reasonable fee is \u2018one that is adequate to compensate counsel, but does not produce windfalls to the attorneys.\u2019\u201d The Court conducted a comprehensive review of the attorney\u2019s billing records and concluded that Plaintiff, in addition to LTD back benefits with both prejudgment and post-judgment interest, she was also entitled to $58,740.00 in attorney\u2019s fees and $3,861.76 in costs.<\/p>\n<p>This case was not handled by our office, but we believe it can be instructive for those seeking back disability benefits, attorneys\u2019 fees and costs. For any question regarding your claim for disability benefits, contact one of our disability attorneys at Dell &amp; Schaefer.<\/p>\n<p> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.disabilitylawblog.com\/2019\/01\/articles\/disability-insurance-industry-news\/reliance-ordered-to-pay-back-ltd-benefits-using-salary-plus-legal-fees\/\">Read the original article at disabilitylawblog.com <\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In the case of Cheryl L. Wallace v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co., the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, previously held that \u201cthe administrative record undisputedly reflects that&#46;&#46;&#46;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":578,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[],"tags":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14809"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/578"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14809"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/14809\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14809"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=14809"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blog.lifeinsurance-orleans.ca\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=14809"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}