A woman has filed a lawsuit against Unum Life Insurance Company of America in Tennessee federal court alleging that the company refused to pay her long-term disability benefits due to her. She applied for disability while she was covered under an employee benefits plan under ERISA, the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974.

Plaintiff Shonda M. was employed by Vanderbilt Medical Center and stopped working on Oct. 29, 2002 as a result of her back and neck pain that was caused by degenerative disc disease. The Unum disability insurance lawsuit states that she was paid her benefits appropriately through Oct. 16, 2015.

At the time her benefits ceased, she received a letter from Unum stating that she had improved and that she could now perform her own occupation. Shonda appealed to Unum’s denial of her benefits. Along with her appeal, she sent information from her doctor that restricted her work to six hours per day, three to four days per week.

Unum did not dispute the data from Shonda’s treating neurologist, but instead ordered that a vocational analysis be conducted to identify clerical occupations that would allow Shonda to earn a gainful wage. At this point, Shonda sent in additional information to Unum that detailed additional health and cognitive deficits and showed that based on the wage data provided by Unum, she could not obtain a gainful occupation part time.

“Though Unum had previously accepted and relied on [the neurologist’s] opinion, Unum now obtained a file review by a non-examining medical consultant to conclude that Plaintiff could perform sedentary exertion on a full-time basis,” the Unum disability insurance lawsuit states. “Unum acted arbitrarily to reject the opinions of Plaintiff’s physicians without a personal determination.”

After Shonda had exhausted all of her administrative remedies under her long-term disability plan by trying to work directly with the company, Shonda chose to file her Unum disability insurance lawsuit.

Shonda has raised a single allegation against the defendant for breach of contract of plan benefits. “As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct of the Defendant in failing to provide benefits for Plaintiff’s disability, Plaintiff has been damaged in the amount equal to the amount of benefits to which [s]he would have been entitled to under the Plan,” the lawsuit alleges.

Shonda’s Unum disability insurance lawsuit goes on to state, “As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct of the Defendant in failing to provide benefits for Plaintiff’s disability, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer in the future, damages under the plan, plus interest and other damages, for a total amount to be determined.”

Shonda is seeking judgment against Unum for damages equal to the amount of disability income benefits to which she was entitled through the date of judgment, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, an order requiring Unum to pay continuing benefits in the future as long as she remains disabled under the terms of the plan, attorneys’ fees and costs and any other relief the court deems just and proper.

The Unum Disability Insurance Lawsuit is Case No. 1:17-cv-00195, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga.