Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

00-3760 O'Reilly v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.

By: dmc-admin//December 3, 2001//

00-3760 O'Reilly v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.

By: dmc-admin//December 3, 2001//

Listen to this article

“Mr. O’Reilly argues that the Plan requires a finding of total disability if he is not able to earn at least 60% of his pre-disability income. He maintains that any position that does not provide compensation at this level ought not be considered an occupation for which he is or could become qualified. After all, if he was totally disabled he would receive 60% of his former income. However, the plain language of the Plan provides for no such replacement income standard. In fact, there is no replacement income standard of any kind. Hartford admits that it does look to such a standard as one factor in guiding its total disability decision. When a claimant’s replacement income is less than 60% of pre-disability income, that factor weighs in favor of a finding of total disability. However, it is only one factor, and the inability to earn 60% of pre-disability income is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition of a total disability finding.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Coar, J., Ripple, J.

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests