By: Derek Hawkins//April 4, 2018//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Margery Newman v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Case No.: 17-1844
Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and EASTERBROOK and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Insurance Claim – Coverage
At age 56, Margery Newman purchased a long-term-care insurance plan from the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”). She opted for one of MetLife’s non-standard options for paying her insurance premiums; MetLife called the method she selected “Reduced-Pay at 65.” When Newman was 67 years old, she was startled to discover that MetLife that year more than doubled her insurance premium. MetLife insists that the increase was consistent with Newman’s insurance policy, including its Reduced-Payat-65 feature. Newman was unpersuaded and brought this action to vindicate her position. The district court dismissed for failure to state a claim. We conclude, however, that the dismissal was premature, and that Newman’s complaint plausibly has alleged facts entitling her to relief. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings.
Reversed and Remanded