Our top life insurance lawyers would like to share some cases involving Reliance Standard.
- Foster v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company:The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged suicide exclusion. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy excluded death by suicide within two years of the effective date and that the plaintiff failed to show that her husband’s death was accidental. The Ninth Circuit affirmed, agreeing with the district court’s analysis.
- Garcia v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company:The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of his father’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying his claim based on an alleged lapse of coverage due to non-payment of premiums. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy terminated due to non-payment and that Reliance properly notified the insured of the lapse. The Fifth Circuit affirmed, deferring to Reliance’s factual findings and policy interpretation.
- Harris v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company:The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged contestability clause. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy allowed Reliance to contest the validity of the coverage within two years of the effective date and that Reliance had sufficient evidence to challenge the insured’s eligibility. The Fourth Circuit affirmed, noting that Reliance acted in good faith and complied with the policy terms.
- Johnson v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged pre-existing condition exclusion. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy excluded death caused by a pre-existing condition within one year of the effective date and that the plaintiff failed to show that her husband’s death was unrelated to his pre-existing condition. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, agreeing with the district court’s analysis.
- Kirkpatrick v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged change of beneficiary form. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy required a written and signed change of beneficiary form and that the plaintiff failed to produce such a form. The Tenth Circuit affirmed, holding that Reliance properly followed the policy provisions and did not act arbitrarily or capriciously.
- Lopez v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of his brother’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying his claim based on an alleged interpleader action. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that Reliance filed an interpleader action in good faith due to conflicting claims by the plaintiff and another beneficiary and that Reliance deposited the policy proceeds into the court registry. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed, finding no evidence of bad faith or breach of contract by Reliance.
- Morgan v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged conversion option. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy allowed the insured to convert his group coverage to an individual policy upon termination of employment and that the insured failed to exercise this option within 31 days of his termination. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding that Reliance properly applied the policy terms and did not waive its right to enforce them.
- Nguyen v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of his father’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying his claim based on an alleged accidental death benefit rider. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy provided an additional benefit for death caused by an accident and that the plaintiff failed to prove that his father’s death was accidental. The First Circuit affirmed, agreeing with the district court’s analysis.
- Zamora v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company: The plaintiff, who was the beneficiary of her husband’s life insurance policy, sued Reliance for denying her claim based on an alleged war risk exclusion. The district court granted summary judgment to Reliance, finding that the policy excluded death caused by war or any act of war and that the plaintiff failed to show that her husband’s death was not related to his military service in Iraq. The Second Circuit affirmed, deferring to Reliance’s policy interpretation and factual findings.
Free Consultation 800-330-2270