Mutual of Omaha Long Term Disability

If you have long term disability coverage through Mutual of Omaha and are struggling with a serious medical condition, you may already know how difficult it can be to secure the benefits you’re entitled to.

Like many disability insurers, Mutual of Omaha has a reputation for scrutinizing claims closely, often looking for reasons to delay or deny benefits rather than support claimants in need. Whether you’re preparing to file a claim, responding to a denial, or simply unsure about your next steps, understanding how Mutual of Omaha handles disability claims can make all the difference.

Why does Mutual of Omaha deny disability claims?

Mutual of Omaha often uses tactics that focus more on finding reasons to deny benefits than on fairly evaluating your disability. Like all insurance companies, Mutual of Omaha operates with a financial incentive to limit payouts. The fewer claims they approve, the more they protect their bottom line. This conflict of interest can lead to overly aggressive claim reviews, especially in long term disability cases where benefits may be paid for years.

Common denial tactics used by Mutual of Omaha include:

• • Cherry-picking from your medical records: Mutual of Omaha may highlight isolated notes that suggest improvement while ignoring consistent documentation of disabling symptoms. This includes dismissing or downplaying your treating doctor’s opinion if it supports your claim.
  • Overbroad use of the pre-existing condition exclusion: Mutual of Omaha might deny your claim by linking your current disability to older, unrelated symptoms or treatments, even when there was no diagnosis or continuity between the two. Courts have rejected this tactic as an unfair stretch of the policy’s terms.
  • Blaming you for limited medical care: If you didn’t pursue aggressive treatment like surgery or didn’t follow up with certain specialists, Mutual of Omaha may argue your condition isn't serious or managed effectively. But this ignores legitimate reasons like financial hardship, lack of insurance, or a doctor’s recommendation to avoid more invasive care.
  • Unfair interpretation of policy terms: Mutual of Omaha sometimes applies policy definitions in ways that deviate from common industry standards, such as unreasonably defining “disability” or misapplying deadlines and documentation rules.
  • Discounting subjective symptoms: Claims involving pain, fatigue, or cognitive issues may be denied simply because they aren't backed by objective test results. Mutual of Omaha has been criticized for dismissing real, disabling symptoms, even when they're well documented and medically credible.
  • Ignoring the combined effect of multiple conditions: Instead of assessing how all your health problems affect your ability to work together, Mutual of Omaha may focus on each one in isolation. This approach can overlook the real-world limitations caused by chronic, overlapping impairments.

These tactics don’t just make the long term disability claims process harder; they often result in wrongful denials. If you suspect Mutual of Omaha didn’t give your claim a fair review, legal help can make a meaningful difference.

Have courts criticized Mutual of Omaha’s disability claims handling practices?

Yes. Courts across the country have criticized Mutual of Omaha (and its affiliate United of Omaha) for how it handles long term disability claims. In multiple cases, judges have found that Mutual of Omaha acted unfairly, misapplied policy language, or failed to consider the full scope of the claimant’s medical condition.

Here are examples of courts criticizing Mutual of Omaha’s handling of long term disability claims:

• • Myers v. Mutual of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 175 F. Supp.3d 820 (N.D. Ohio 2016): The court found that Mutual of Omaha acted arbitrarily and capriciously by selectively reviewing only portions of the claimant’s medical records that supported denial, while ignoring key treatment notes from her physician that supported disability.
  • Smith v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 776 F. App’x 825 (5th Cir. 2019): The Fifth Circuit rejected Mutual of Omaha’s argument that metastatic ovarian cancer was a “pre-existing condition,” ruling that the insurer’s interpretation was unsupported by the policy language and improperly used to deny benefits.
  • Kaiser v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 2016 WL 379814 (W.D. Wis. Jan. 29, 2016): The court criticized Mutual of Omaha for invoking the pre-existing condition exclusion to deny benefits without a reasonable basis, calling the denial arbitrary and capricious.
  • Smith v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 2018 WL 3519813 (S.D. Miss. May 21, 2018), aff’d, 776 F. App’x 825 (5th Cir. 2019): The court held that Mutual of Omaha’s use of the pre-existing condition exclusion to deny benefits was an abuse of discretion, as the medical evidence showed no causal link between the alleged prior condition and the claimant’s disabling illness.
  • Purifoy v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 2013 WL 3936737 (E.D. Mich. July 30, 2013): The court found that Mutual of Omaha improperly discredited the claimant’s credibility based on her inability to obtain recommended treatment, despite her lack of insurance and financial hardship. The court also noted the insurer ignored relevant evidence and failed to interpret the plan in light of all the medical documentation.
  • Warner v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co., 2012 WL 3779041 (D. Or. Aug. 1, 2012), adopted, 2012 WL 3779035 (D. Or. Aug. 29, 2012): The court determined the claimant had submitted adequate proof of loss under the terms of the policy and remanded the case back to Mutual of Omaha for further review, implicitly criticizing the insurer for not properly assessing the evidence provided.
  • Rappa v. Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co., 2017 WL 3394111 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 8, 2017): The court denied Mutual of Omaha’s motion to dismiss a claim for breach of fiduciary duty, allowing the case to move forward and signaling concern with how the insurer handled the claimant’s benefits.

These rulings show that courts are willing to step in when Mutual of Omaha uses unfair tactics to deny claims. If your disability claim has been denied, it’s important to know that you have legal rights to challenge that decision.

What strategies work best against Mutual of Omaha?

If you’re facing a denial or delay from Mutual of Omaha on your long term disability claim, the most effective strategy is to approach your case with consideration and legal support. Mutual of Omaha has a history of using technicalities and selective evidence to justify denials, so your response needs to be strategic and thorough.

Here are some strategies for approaching your long term disability claim with Mutual of Omaha:

• • Build a complete and consistent medical record: Make sure your treating physicians clearly document your symptoms, limitations, and how your medical condition prevents you from working. Detailed notes that match what you’ve reported in your claim can reduce Mutual of Omaha’s ability to cherry-pick evidence.
  • Gather supporting statements from your doctors: Have your treating physicians provide detailed letters or forms that outline your diagnosis, prognosis, restrictions, and how your condition prevents you from performing work duties. These opinions are often more persuasive when they are well reasoned and supported by medical evidence.
  • Avoid inconsistencies in your claim: Make sure that what you tell your doctors, report on activity logs, and state on claim forms all align. Mutual of Omaha may look for discrepancies to question your credibility.
  • Document functional limitations, not just diagnosis: A diagnosis alone isn’t enough. You should demonstrate how your condition impacts your ability to perform tasks, such as standing, concentrating, lifting, or working full days. Functional impairment is often the key issue in long term disability claims.
  • Respond promptly to all requests for information: Mutual of Omaha may delay or deny claims based on missing documents or deadlines. Track all correspondence and respond to requests for updates, forms, or medical records as quickly and thoroughly as possible.
  • Don’t go it alone: Whether you’re filing your initial claim, appealing a denial, or preparing for litigation, having an experienced long term disability attorney by your side can make all the difference. A lawyer can help you avoid common mistakes, ensure your paperwork and medical evidence meet Mutual of Omaha’s standards, and protect your rights throughout the process. If your claim is denied, your attorney can identify weaknesses in the insurer’s reasoning, gather additional medical and vocational support, and build a strong record in case the matter ends up in court.

Taking a proactive, well-documented, and legally informed approach gives you the best chance of overcoming a denial and getting the benefits you deserve from Mutual of Omaha.

What should I do if Mutual of Omaha denies my disability claim?

A denial from Mutual of Omaha can be frustrating and overwhelming, but it’s not the end of the road. If your disability policy is part of a group plan through your employer, it’s likely governed by ERISA (the Employee Retirement Income Security Act), which comes with a specific and strict appeals process.

Here are steps you can take when facing a denial from Mutual of Omaha:

• • Carefully review the denial letter: Mutual of Omaha must explain the reasons for denying your claim. The letter should list the medical evidence reviewed, the policy language they relied on, and the specific basis for the denial. It will also include your deadline to appeal (which is typically 180 days from the date of the denial). This letter is the roadmap for your appeal.
  • Understand this is likely your one chance to submit evidence: Under ERISA, the internal appeal is your only opportunity to build the official record. If you later go to court, you generally can’t add any new documentation. That means your appeal must include all relevant medical records, doctor letters, test results, and any other evidence that proves your disability.
  • Gather strong medical and vocational support: It’s not enough to say you’re disabled — Mutual of Omaha will require clear documentation showing how your condition limits your ability to work. Ask your treating physicians to write detailed letters explaining your functional restrictions, include any physical or cognitive testing, and consider a vocational expert’s opinion if your occupation requires specialized skills.
  • Consult an experienced long term disability attorney: ERISA appeals are highly technical, and Mutual of Omaha has significant legal resources. A long term disability attorney can help you understand the weaknesses in their denial, organize and present your evidence effectively, and ensure your appeal meets all legal standards. Having an attorney involved early can also deter the insurer from cutting corners during the review.
  • Be mindful of the appeal deadline: Once the 180-day deadline passes, you may lose the right to appeal altogether. The sooner you start gathering records and legal support, the stronger your appeal will be. Don’t wait until the last minute to ask for help.

A denial doesn’t mean your claim is hopeless, but how you respond makes all the difference. With a well-prepared appeal and legal guidance, you can challenge Mutual of Omaha’s decision and fight for the benefits you deserve.

How can an attorney help me win disability benefits from Mutual of Omaha?

Winning long term disability benefits from Mutual of Omaha requires a strategic, legally sound approach tailored to your unique occupation and medical condition. An experienced attorney can help at every stage: guiding you through a smooth transition out of work, strengthening your medical documentation, anticipating insurer pushback, and ensuring your claim meets both the policy terms and legal standards.

Whether you’re filing an initial claim, appealing a denial, or preparing for litigation, legal support can make the difference between approval and a drawn-out battle.

Riemer Hess Client Success Story

Our client “Brandon” was a senior executive at a Fortune 500 company when he was diagnosed with spinal stenosis, a serious condition that caused chronic neck pain, numbness, and loss of coordination. As his symptoms progressed, it became clear he could no longer keep up with the demands of his high-stakes executive role. Unsure how to step away from work without risking his financial future, Brandon retained Riemer Hess to guide him through the long term disability claim process with Mutual of Omaha.

Our team helped Brandon plan a strategic exit from work, ensuring his transition aligned with his policy’s requirements and did not raise red flags with the insurer. We reviewed his medical records and identified where additional support was needed. When Mutual of Omaha pushed back on the strength of his evidence, we worked directly with Brandon’s treating doctors to obtain detailed narrative reports that clearly explained how his condition limited his ability to perform the essential duties of his occupation — not just physically, but functionally and cognitively.

Thanks to this comprehensive approach, Mutual of Omaha approved Brandon’s LTD claim without delay or appeal. With his benefits secured, Brandon was able to step away from work confidently and focus on managing his health. Our firm continues to support him in protecting his benefits for the long term, ensuring his financial stability remains intact.