Employed at the Florida Coastal School of Law as a professor and later an associate dean for over ten years, Ms. Y was declared disabled by Prudential Life Insurance in a letter on January 21, 2011, but has not received any payments of those benefits six months later. In an attempt to collect her disability benefits, Ms. Y and her Florida disability attorney filed a federal complaint in the United States District Court of Florida.

Background of Ms. Y’s Case

Ms. Y worked at Florida Coastal School of Law from 1995 until 2006 and is a participant in the school’s long term disability plan offered through Prudential Life Insurance. Ms. Y ceased working at the school as a result of multiple sclerosis and blindness, and even though Prudential is supposed to be paying disability benefits to MS. Y, she has incurred vast medical bills in treatment of her condition which Prudential has also failed to pay as promised. Ms. Y and her Florida disability attorney brought this lawsuit under the terms of ERISA for breach of fiduciary duty against the administrator and fiduciary for refusing to follow those terms.

In its January 21, 2011 letter to Ms. Y, Prudential acknowledged that Ms. Y has been disabled since August 1, 2005 until the present and that she continues to meet the “contractual definitions of disability of the Florida Coastal School of Law under the contract.” However, in violation of its fiduciary responsibility to pay those benefits, Prudential continued to refuse to pay Ms. Y her disability benefits. Having exhausted all her administrative appeals to get her disability benefits and backed up by scores of case law, Ms. Y did file a lawsuit against the insurer in Federal Court in Florida. With the initial suit, Ms. Y and her Florida disability attorney were successful in obtaining a summary judgment against Prudential.

Claiming that there were outstanding litigation issues concerning Ms. Y’s claim for benefits in the January 21, 2011 letter and saying in addition to “whether [her claim] was timely,” the insurer confirmed that “these will be addressed separately by Prudential’s counsel.” After refusing to pay Ms Y her disability benefits after the January letter, Prudential requested a stay from the Court on its judgment, which was denied. Prudential then sent the request to the Eleventh Circuit of Appeals and on June 15, 2011, the Court of Appeals also denied Prudential’s motion “concluding it was not a money judgment and ‘a consideration of the factors to be analyzed in deciding whether a non-money judgment should be stayed, does not weigh in favor of entering a stay.’” Consequently, one day after the Appeals Court opinion, Ms. Y’s Florida disability attorney again asked Prudential to provide Ms. Y her disability benefits, but the insurer refused.

Ms. Y and her Florida Disability Attorney File this Lawsuit to Enforce the Judgment of Ms. Y’s Previous Suite against Prudential

While Ms. Y and her Florida disability lawyer agree that the injunction was appreciated, they state in this most recent lawsuit that “other appropriate equitable relief is necessary for Ms. Y to be made whole,” as Prudential breached its fiduciary duty to Ms. Y by not paying her long term disability benefits as set forth in the terms of her plan. According the 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3), Ms. Y has the right to receive the equitable remedy of a surcharge because of Prudential’s breach of its fiduciary duty. Ms. Y and her Florida disability attorney ask for monetary compensation for:

  • Profits the insurer earned on Ms. Y’s withheld disability benefits;
  • Ongoing harm to Ms. Y’s health because of the withholding of her disability benefits;
  • The physical and emotional distress cause by the withholding of Ms. Y’s disability benefits;
  • The increase of federal income taxes that resulted from the application of a “higher marginal rate; and
  • Loss of earnings of interest on the money she should have received.

Ms. Y’s Florida disability attorney goes on to opine that Ms. Y was caused injury and harm in that she was unable to purchase certain drugs for her condition as a result of the lack of disability benefits and that the stress from having to worry about the situation caused by the insurer set Ms. Y back financially, physically, and emotionally, exacerbating her multiple sclerosis and blindness condition.

In addition, to the other demands in her complaint, Ms. Y, through her Florida disability lawyer asks the Court for Reimbursement from Prudential of attorney’s fees and costs of litigation.