194:
occupation. The guiding focus is whether an insured was unable to perform the substantial and material duties of her own occupation in the usual and customary way with reasonable continuity. Second, the 9th
Circuit affirmed that recovery under total disability is not precluded because an insured was able to generate income during her disability. Disability insurance is designed not as insurance against loss of income, but as a substitute for earnings when an insured is deprived of the capacity to earn an income. Third, repeated use of a medical examiner overcomes any presumption that an insurance company’s denial of a claim is a genuine dispute. The practice of using the same medical examiner when claims are being rejected evinces bad faith on the part of the insurance company.
28:
169:, the 9th Circuit ruled the defendant insurance company, UnumProvident, engaged in biased and bad faith claims handling and investigation. This case marked a milestone victory for disabled claimants who were rejected because disability insurers were basing their decisions on an improper definition of total disability. The 9th Circuit made it clear that California law controls the definition of this crucial phrase in disability policies.
193:
gave several important findings of law that aid disabled claimants. First, futile attempts to return to an occupation are insufficient to reverse a jury’s determination of total disability under
California law. Total disability may still be found, even if an insured was able to do some work under her
152:
and fair dealing, and intentional misrepresentation. Magistrate Judge James Larson presided over the oral arguments by
Plaintiff's attorneys Ray Bourhis, Alice Wolfson, David Lilienstein, and Daniel Smith, and Defendants' attorneys Horace Greene and Evan Tager. After eleven days of trial, a jury of
140:
Mrs. Hangarter's doctors concluded she was totally disabled, however, Paul Revere disputed the results. After Paul Revere terminated Mrs. Hangarter's benefits, the company attached her bank account for the insurance premiums, until the account was drained, at which point the company cancelled her
136:
After almost ten years as a successful chiropractor, Joan
Hangarter purchased an individual disability insurance policy from the Paul Revere Life Insurance Company. The agent explained that even if she could still do paperwork or other work, if Mrs. Hangarter could not work as a chiropractor, the
137:
policy would cover her. The policy also provided that after she had been disabled for 90 days, future premiums would be waived while she remained disabled. Several years after purchasing the policy, Mrs. Hangarter suffered from a shoulder injury and cervical disc disease.
186:
With experts on insurance claims practices, the
Daubert factors will not preclude the kind of testimony whose reliability depends on the knowledge and experience of the expert, rather than the theory or technical framework behind it.
465:
352:
427:
379:"Adjusting the definition: a court ruling maintains that a literal interpretation of the total disability clause would defeat the very purpose of own-occupation disability insurance"
128:. Because California’s bad faith insurance law is often referred to in many states as a model nationwide, the 9th Circuit’s decision has a persuasive impact throughout the country.
277:
38:
470:
460:
378:
475:
180:
303:
233:
144:
Mrs. Hangarter subsequently brought a diversity action against Paul Revere, alleging violation of § 17200 of the Unfair
Competition Act,
281:
411:
27:
401:
428:"An Insurer's Use of an IME Can Serve as Evidence of Bad Faith Against the Insurer : Property Insurance Coverage Law Blog"
245:
The Rutter Group, "Insurance
Litigation", "Federal Ninth Circuit Civil Appellate Practice", "Federal Civil Trials and Evidence"
153:
six returned a unanimous verdict for
Hangarter that awarded over $ 7.5 million, with $ 5 million of the verdict made up of a
212:"HANGARTER v. PROVIDENT LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, No. 02-17423., June 25, 2004 - US 9th Circuit | FindLaw"
121:
455:
326:
125:
145:
101:
97:
256:"Cervical Degenerative Disc Disease : Conditions & Diagnoses | UCLA Spine Center"
407:
93:
154:
211:
175:
is also a landmark decision in the area of admissibility of expert testimony, under the
449:
351:
Cusato, Karen; Cohen, Jeffrey M.; Mazer, Jason S.; Romero, Robert J. (March 2013).
255:
149:
117:
353:"The Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Insurance Coverage Since Daubert"
165:
Affirming in part and reversing in part the district court's opinion in
176:
112:, 373 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2004), (UnumProvident, now referred to as
113:
67:
327:"Standards for Admissibility of Insurance Expert Testimony"
466:
United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit cases
430:. Propertyinsurancecoveragelaw.com. September 9, 2010
39:
United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
89:
84:
74:
62:
54:
49:
Hangarter v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co.
44:
34:
20:
167:Hangarter v. Paul Revere Life Insurance Company
8:
26:
17:
258:. Spinecenter.ucla.edu. December 29, 2010
400:Piechowski, Lisa Drago (June 22, 2011).
110:Hangarter v. Provident Insurance Company
304:"Hangarter V. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co"
203:
377:Darras, Frank N. (November 1, 2004).
7:
403:Evaluation of Workplace Disability
234:UnumProvident Corp. Now Unum Group
120:), is a landmark decision by the
14:
471:United States disability case law
280:. Leginfo.ca.gov. Archived from
461:United States evidence case law
80:Affirmed lower court's decision
476:2004 in United States case law
1:
278:"CA Codes (bpc:17200-17210)"
148:, breach of the covenant of
122:9th Circuit Court of Appeals
124:on the issue of disability
492:
79:
25:
179:factors laid out by the
126:bad faith insurance law
332:. Apps.americanbar.org
173:Hangarter v. Provident
21:Hangarter v. Provident
325:Engh, Anna P (2009).
214:. Caselaw.findlaw.com
381:. Thefreelibrary.com
232:Unum News Release, "
284:on October 10, 2013
456:Insurance case law
146:breach of contract
102:Richard R. Clifton
98:A. Wallace Tashima
358:. Americanbar.org
236:" (March 2, 2007)
107:
106:
94:Alfred T. Goodwin
483:
440:
439:
437:
435:
424:
418:
417:
397:
391:
390:
388:
386:
374:
368:
367:
365:
363:
357:
348:
342:
341:
339:
337:
331:
322:
316:
315:
313:
311:
300:
294:
293:
291:
289:
274:
268:
267:
265:
263:
252:
246:
243:
237:
230:
224:
223:
221:
219:
208:
155:punitive damages
85:Court membership
30:
18:
491:
490:
486:
485:
484:
482:
481:
480:
446:
445:
444:
443:
433:
431:
426:
425:
421:
414:
399:
398:
394:
384:
382:
376:
375:
371:
361:
359:
355:
350:
349:
345:
335:
333:
329:
324:
323:
319:
309:
307:
302:
301:
297:
287:
285:
276:
275:
271:
261:
259:
254:
253:
249:
244:
240:
231:
227:
217:
215:
210:
209:
205:
200:
163:
134:
12:
11:
5:
489:
487:
479:
478:
473:
468:
463:
458:
448:
447:
442:
441:
419:
412:
392:
369:
343:
317:
295:
269:
247:
238:
225:
202:
201:
199:
196:
162:
159:
133:
130:
105:
104:
91:
90:Judges sitting
87:
86:
82:
81:
77:
76:
72:
71:
64:
60:
59:
56:
52:
51:
46:
45:Full case name
42:
41:
36:
32:
31:
23:
22:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
488:
477:
474:
472:
469:
467:
464:
462:
459:
457:
454:
453:
451:
429:
423:
420:
415:
413:9780195341096
409:
405:
404:
396:
393:
380:
373:
370:
354:
347:
344:
328:
321:
318:
305:
299:
296:
283:
279:
273:
270:
257:
251:
248:
242:
239:
235:
229:
226:
213:
207:
204:
197:
195:
192:
188:
184:
182:
181:Supreme Court
178:
174:
170:
168:
160:
158:
156:
151:
147:
142:
138:
131:
129:
127:
123:
119:
115:
111:
103:
99:
95:
92:
88:
83:
78:
73:
69:
65:
61:
58:June 25, 2004
57:
53:
50:
47:
43:
40:
37:
33:
29:
24:
19:
16:
434:September 9,
432:. Retrieved
422:
402:
395:
385:September 9,
383:. Retrieved
372:
362:September 9,
360:. Retrieved
346:
336:September 9,
334:. Retrieved
320:
310:September 9,
308:. Retrieved
306:. Leagle.com
298:
288:September 9,
286:. Retrieved
282:the original
272:
262:September 9,
260:. Retrieved
250:
241:
228:
218:September 9,
216:. Retrieved
206:
190:
189:
185:
172:
171:
166:
164:
143:
139:
135:
109:
108:
48:
15:
450:Categories
198:References
150:good faith
118:Unum Group
191:Hangarter
141:policy.
63:Citation
177:Daubert
161:Holding
157:award.
132:History
75:Holding
55:Decided
410:
356:(PDF)
330:(PDF)
35:Court
436:2013
408:ISBN
387:2013
364:2013
338:2013
312:2013
290:2013
264:2013
220:2013
114:Unum
68:F.3d
66:373
116:or
70:998
452::
406:.
183:.
100:,
96:,
438:.
416:.
389:.
366:.
340:.
314:.
292:.
266:.
222:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
