No announcement yet.

District Court calls out Reliance Standard

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • District Court calls out Reliance Standard

    In reading Leila's post about UNUM's use of the DOT to determine job duties, I noted that the opinion made frequent references to cases involving Reliance Standard which, in turn, reminded me of a recent case from the Southern District of Mississippi. I think any/all ERISA practitioners should be aware of this one. It concerns the same subject - at least in part - but involves Reliance Standard rather than UNUM. I contains numerous cite-worthy references, but this one really does encapsulate the Judge's point:

    This Court has conducted a cumbersome review of judicial opinions addressing Reliance's behavior in disability cases. That review found over 100 opinions in the last 21 years criticizing Reliance's disability decisions, including over 60 opinions reversing a decision as an abuse of discretion or as arbitrary and capricious. These opinions are often scathing. Judges describe the behavior underlying Reliance's claims administration as "arbitrary," "blind," "conclusory," "extreme," "flawed," "fraught," "illogical," "inadequate," "inappropri*ate," "incomplete," "indifferent," "lax," "misguided," "opportunisti[c]," "precursory," "questionable," "remarkable," "selective," "self-serving," "skewed," "tainted," "troubling," "unfair," "unreasonable," and "unreliable."

    RSL has appealed the case. Regardless, a copy is attached (or, at least, I've tried to attach a copy. If I failed, email me and I'll send you a copy.)
    Attached Files