Info Library

Hartford is the fourth largest disability insurance company in the U.S., growing even larger after its acquisition of Aetna in 2017.  Like all disability insurers, Hartford is motivated to deny benefits to its claimants to increase their profit margins.  See Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn, 554 U.S. 105, 115 (2008).  When filing a long term disability claim with Hartford, you are likely to face scrutiny from their representatives who will look for any justification to reject your claim.

Riemer Hess regularly wins fights against Hartford on behalf of our clients.  We understand how Hartford operates when evaluating disability claims and how to build a strategy to secure your benefits.  Below we will discuss the common tactics Hartford uses to deny disability claims and what strategies work best against Hartford.

In Jacoby v. Hartford, 254 F.R.D. 477 (S.D.N.Y. 2009), the Federal District in New York City ordered Hartford to produce thousands of pages of documents pertaining to Hartford’s inherent conflict of interest. Rejecting Hartford’s claims of confidentiality and burdensomeness, the Court ordered Hartford to respond to plaintiff’s interrogatories and document demands, including the full production of Hartford’s BMS Claims Manual and SIU Reference Manual. The Court also rejected Hartford’s claim that documents held by its consulting firms Medical Advisory Group and University Disability Consortium were not within its “possession, custody or control.”
This decision is a valuable precedent because it provides a possible solution to the dilemma of being whipsawed between the insurance company and its consultants. When seeking documents, each entity claims that the other has the sole duty of producing the requested documents. In this case, the Court rejected Hartford's assertion that the documents held by its consultants, Medical Advisory Group and University Disability Consortium were outside Hartford's control. The Court ordered Hartford to use its influence with its consultants to obtain the requested documents. The Court held:

A claimant suffering from bipolar disorder may bring a Lawsuit Disability New York under a fictitious name in order to preserve his privacy. Riemer Hess convinced the federal district court in New Jersey to allow our client to serve as the lead plaintiff in a class action, using the name "John Doe" instead of his real name. Our client was very concerned that if he used his real name that he would be stigmatized as having bipolar disorder, causing him embarrassment and preventing him from working in the future. The Court agreed, holding: