Riemer & Associates convinces the Federal Court in Manhattan to vacate CIGNA's denial of benefits
In Zoller v. CIGNA, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67475 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2008), the Federal District Court in Manhattan held that CIGNA’s denial of benefits was not supported by substantial evidence and was thus an abuse of discretion. The Court criticized the doctor hired by CIGNA to review plaintiff’s file: As a remedy, the Court awarded benefits to plaintiff from the date of disability to the present, without the need for a remand to the CIGNA.
Dr. Abramson's Report failed (1) "to adequately and credibly rebut the findings of [plaintiffs] treating physicians," (2) to consider relevant evidence of plaintiff's lack of "robust" daily activity during the relevant period, and, (3) it appears, to accurately recite portions of his telephone conversation with Dr. Barnes regarding plaintiff's ability to work at "any occupation." Therefore, the Court finds that the Report, by itself, does not constitute evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the rejection of plaintiff's benefits claim. (citations omitted).