Legal Opinion
Edward Raybourne v. CIGNA Life Insu
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided November 21, 2012No. 11-1295, 11-1427PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROVNER, Circuit Judge.
The Social Security Administration (“SSA”) found that Edward Raybourne was disabled under the agency’s standards. The district court found that Raybourne was disabled under the terms of the long-term disability insurance policy he held with the defendant. The defendant insuranee company found that he was not disabled. The district court concluded that the company’s denial of benefits was based on a conflict of interest rather than on the facts and the terms of the policy. We affirm.
I
This is the second appeal in this case and we refer readers to our earlier opinion for a…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Max I. Bittner v. Sadoff & Rudoy IndustriesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1984
- Holmstrom v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Deborah Kenseth v. Dean Health Plan, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Donna Geiger v. Aetna Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
- Donald Tompkins v. Central Laborers' Pension FunCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Shirley Lacko v. United of Omaha Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
- Susan Hennen v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2018
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.