Life Insurance Lawyer New Mexico

Our New Mexico life insurance lawyers are here to help. We serve all states. Free consultation.

2025 New Mexico Denied Life Insurance Claims

AAA COVID-19 death denial won $103,200.00
Mass shooting New Mexico exclusions $44,000.00
Accidental Death & Dismemberment drugs $260,000.00
Kemper intoxication exclusion $111,000.00
American United coronavirus death $25,000.00
National Life Group felony exclusion $49,000.00
AD&D denial due to oxycontin won $208,000.00
Southern Farm Bureau wrong age $97,000.00
Midland National suicide exclusion $55,000.00
VGLI beneficiary change form $405,325.00
Ohio National chronic illness exclusion $40,000.00
Cuna Mutual felony exclusion crime $21,000.00

Lincoln Heritage interpleader lawsuit $308,000.00
Primerica self-inflicted injury suicide $212,000.00
AIG no coverage at the time of death $459,000.00
Foresters drunk driving death issue $280,000.00
New Mexico denied life insurance claim $1,357,200.00
ERISA competing claimants issue $182,000.00
Globe material misrepresentation $114,000.00
Mutual of Omaha autoerotic asphyxiation death $229,000.00
Genworth issue with grace period $102,270.00
New Mexico divorce and life insurance $826,900.00
SGLI resolution with beneficiaries $400,000.00
Transamerica policy not in force $105,000.00
FEGLI invalid beneficiary designation $135,200.00
New Mexico denied AD&D policy $754,000.00
USAA non-payment of premiums $116,000.00

While most people are familiar with the basic reasons life insurance claims can be denied—such as missed premium payments or pre-existing conditions—there are other, less common factors that can also lead to a denial. Companies like MetLife, USAA, and Transamerica may refuse to pay out claims for reasons that beneficiaries might not anticipate. In these cases, it’s important to understand the nuances of life insurance policies, common exclusions, and the legal mechanisms in place for contesting denials, including the involvement of interpleader lawsuits and beneficiary disputes.

One unexpected reason for a life insurance claim denial in New Mexico involves the "material misrepresentation" clause. Insurers such as Prudential, Lincoln Heritage, and Securian Financial may deny claims if the policyholder’s application contains any misstatements or omissions, even if they seem minor or unrelated to the cause of death. For instance, if the policyholder was asked about their medical history and failed to disclose a past condition like high blood pressure or diabetes—conditions that may not directly relate to their cause of death—the insurer might argue that this constitutes a material misrepresentation and void the policy. This type of denial is particularly frustrating because the insurer might refuse to pay out even if the cause of death wasn’t related to the undisclosed condition, leading to legal challenges from beneficiaries who feel that their loved one’s death should be covered.

In a similar vein, another less common but significant reason for life insurance denials is the "suicide exclusion." While many people know that life insurance policies typically exclude coverage if the insured dies by suicide within a specific period, the details of this exclusion can vary. Insurers like AIG, Anthem, and The Hartford may interpret this clause broadly, leading to denials even in cases where the cause of death may be borderline, such as if the policyholder engaged in self-harm or had a history of suicidal thoughts. This can lead to additional challenges, especially if the death occurred just outside of the exclusion window, or if there was no clear intention of suicide but a fatal accident instead. Insurers often carry out a thorough investigation into such claims, which can result in delays and denials if they determine that the death falls under the suicide exclusion.

Another potential reason for claim denial in New Mexico involves "improper policy changes." This situation often occurs when the policyholder changes their beneficiary, coverage amount, or other significant elements of the policy shortly before death. Companies like State Farm, Symetra, and Reliastar may find that these alterations were made without proper documentation or compliance with the terms of the policy, and they could argue that the coverage was not valid at the time of death. Even minor discrepancies, such as an unsigned beneficiary change form or lack of notarization, can lead to the insurer refusing to honor the claim. In these situations, beneficiaries are left in a difficult position, requiring legal assistance to resolve the issue.

In some instances, New Mexico beneficiaries face claim denials due to the policyholder’s involvement in activities deemed "hazardous." While many policies from companies like MassMutual, Lincoln Financial, and Reliance Standard may offer basic coverage, they often include exclusions for activities like skydiving, scuba diving, or other extreme sports. If a policyholder dies while participating in one of these activities, the insurer may deny the claim, citing the policy's exclusion for hazardous pursuits. Insurers generally expect policyholders to disclose any such activities on their applications, but it is not always clear when an activity is considered too risky or when it should have been disclosed. For example, a person who participates in recreational hiking might not view it as a hazardous activity, but if they hike in remote, dangerous areas and their death is tied to the risks associated with the activity, the insurer may find a reason to refuse the payout.

However, even less common reasons, like "insufficient proof of insurable interest," can lead to denials. Insurers such as Foresters, Globe Life, and Jackson Life may argue that the beneficiary has no legitimate financial interest in the policyholder’s life. For example, a person who is named as a beneficiary but doesn’t have a direct financial relationship with the deceased—such as a distant relative or a non-immediate family member—may be denied the death benefit. This issue often arises in situations where a life insurance policy is purchased by someone other than the policyholder, and there are questions surrounding whether the beneficiary has the legal right to the payout.

Another lesser-known reason for denial arises when there is a "failure to properly contestability clauses." During the contestability period (usually the first two years of the policy), the insurer has the right to investigate and even deny a claim if they find discrepancies or potential fraud in the policyholder’s application. This period is crucial for insurers like New York Life, American National, and Erie, which may refuse claims based on incomplete or inaccurate answers provided during the application process. This might not always be a straightforward issue but could be linked to an investigation into whether the policyholder intentionally misrepresented key information about their health, occupation, or other factors.

In addition to these uncommon reasons for claim denials, beneficiary disputes can also complicate the claims process in New Mexico. It’s not uncommon for family members, ex-spouses, or other individuals to challenge the designation of a beneficiary, especially if the policyholder's will or other legal documents are unclear. When a policyholder’s beneficiary designation is contested, insurers like Allianz, Protective Life, and Ameriprise may refuse to pay out the death benefit until the dispute is resolved in court. In these cases, the insurance company may file a life insurance interpleader lawsuit. This lawsuit allows the insurer to deposit the death benefit into the court's registry and essentially let the court decide which party is entitled to the funds. The interpleader process can cause substantial delays in the payment of death benefits, and it can be a particularly bitter experience for beneficiaries caught in the middle of a family dispute.

While the primary reason insurers pursue an interpleader lawsuit is to avoid liability, it can also arise from disagreements over the validity of the beneficiary’s claim. In cases where multiple people present conflicting evidence of their right to the death benefit, the insurer might file the lawsuit to ensure they don’t face additional legal complications down the line. Beneficiaries involved in an interpleader lawsuit are often left waiting for the courts to settle the matter, which can take a considerable amount of time. Legal counsel is typically necessary to navigate the complexities of interpleader actions and ensure that the claimant’s rights are protected.

For those dealing with life insurance denials or disputes in New Mexico, it is crucial to seek professional legal advice. When claim denials occur due to unusual or obscure reasons—such as misrepresentation, policy lapses, or ambiguous causes of death—beneficiaries should understand their options for appealing or contesting the denial. If a beneficiary dispute arises, or if the insurer is involved in an interpleader lawsuit, working with an attorney can help to expedite the process and ensure the claim is handled appropriately. It’s also important for individuals to carefully review their life insurance policies when purchasing coverage to avoid issues later on, making sure all terms and exclusions are understood before filing a claim.

Questions about life insurance claims in New Mexico

What do I do if my life insurance claim in NM was denied?

You need to a top NM life insurance lawyer to represent you.

What do I do If I was served with a life insurance interpleader lawsuit in NM?

You don't want to jeopardize your case, so you'll need a top NM life insurance attorney for representation.

What do I do if I have a life insurance beneficiary dispute in New Mexico?

Our top NM life insurance law firm can represent you with respect to your beneficiary dispute.

Why would an accidental death & dismemberment life insurance claim in New Mexico be denied?

An AD&D life insurance claim is typically denied either because the death was caused by a medical event not an accident, or that there was alcohol involved which is typically an exclusion in the policy.

Can policy lapse be a reason for a denied life insurance claim in New Mexico?

Yes, but the lapse can be contested by our life insurance attorneys.

Is alleged misrepresentation on a life insurance application a reason for a denied life insurance claim in New Mexico?

Yes, but our life law firm can dispute the misrepresentation.

Can an alcohol exclusion be a reason for a denied life insurance claim in New Mexico?

Yes, but there are ways a life insurance lawyer can dispute this.

What do I do about a bad faith ERISA life insurance denial of death benefits in New Mexico?

As you only have one appeal, best to have our lawyers resolve it.

What should I do about a life insurance contestability period claim denial in New Mexico?

You should always get legal representation as any denial can be contested.

What do I do if I get a denial letter for my life insurance claim stating it was denied due to New Mexico state law?

There are many exceptions to denials based on state law.

Interpleader Lawyer New Mexico

New Mexico Life Insurance Law

Life insurance companies are like any other for-profit business. They exist for the sole purpose of making the most money for executives and shareholders. To do this, they need to collect as much money as possible. This typically happens by collecting premiums from policyholders. In addition to that, however, life insurance companies strive to avoid spending money. To achieve this goal, they try very hard to avoid paying out claims against policies.

Indeed, life insurance companies (and the armies of lawyers they employ) have become experts at concocting reasons for denying claims. This claim denial process begins before a single person ever purchases a policy. It begins with the drafting of long-winded, complex, and oft-times confusing policy language. The most important provisions of these policies for the insurance companies are the exclusions.

Exclusions are basically formal reasons why the life insurance company can deny a claim. Some common exclusions include suicide, material misrepresentations in the application process, and nonpayment of premiums. Of course, there are lesser known exclusions as well. One of those involves death during the commission of a crime.

This article explores a case where an insurance company used this lesser known exclusion to deny a valid claim for death benefits. Fortunately, this case turned out favorably for the beneficiary. Many, however, do not – especially when beneficiaries try to navigate the muddy waters of the insurance industry on their own.

A passionate romance

The case at hand involves a married couple – Linda and John. Linda and John met while they were attending college and fell madly in love. Within a year of graduation, they were married. Driven by a common desire to succeed, both of them obtained graduate degrees and went on to accept high-paying jobs in medical research and development.

Everyone who knew John and Linda knew one truth about them – as much as they loved one another, they were prone to having epic arguments. This was true from the outset of their relationship and was an unfortunate reality that plagued them throughout their lives together. Ultimately, it was their passionate arguing that led to John’s demise.

One fourth of July, John and Linda attended a large party at the home of one of their friends. The home was located out in the country off of a narrow and winding road. Though John had agreed to act as the couple’s designated driver that evening, he ended up having a few drinks before the sun went down. This angered Linda who, having had several drinks herself, proceeded to berate John in front of their friends.

Enraged, John hopped in the couple’s car on his own. As he sped away from the party, several people expressed concern for his safety. Knowing the couple’s propensity to fight and make up rather quickly, however, no one did anything to stop John.

Unfortunately, this was to be the couple’s last fight. As he sped away from the party, John failed to negotiate a curve in the road and his car veered off an embankment. John’s body was found in the car the next morning. He had not survived the impact.

The police undertook a full investigation surrounding the circumstances of the accident. The police report noted that John may have been driving as fast as 100 miles per hour – a speed that constituted a felony in that state. Not having any witnesses to the accident, however, their only conclusive finding was that John was driving above the posted speed limit when he lost control of the car. A coroner’s report stated that John’s cause of death was blunt force trauma occasioned by the accident.

Sadly life insurance claim denied

Shortly after the accident, Linda dug out John’s life insurance policy. The policy provided a death benefit of $50,000, plus an additional $150,000 if John died accidentally. Linda made a claim for the full $200,000 benefit. Given that John died in an accident, Linda never thought her claim would be denied.

That is exactly what happened, however. Nearly one month after Linda submitted her claim, she received a claim denial letter in the mail. The stated reason for the denial was that John died during the commission of a felony (driving in excess of 100 mph) and that the policy contained an express exclusion relieving the insurance company from paying a claim under such circumstances.

Linda was devastated. On top of losing her husband, she was now unsure how she was going to pay off the mortgage on the couple’s house. Just as she was becoming resigned to the claim denial, a friend suggested she call an attorney specializing in the wrongful denial of life insurance claims.

It’s a good thing she did. The attorney successfully argued in court that there had been no conclusive finding that John was driving at a felony rate of speed at the time of his death. Rather, police simply noted that he “may have” been driving 100 mph. Without additional proof that a felony occurred, the life insurance company had no basis for invoking the felony exclusion of John’s life insurance policy.

Ultimately, the court agreed. It awarded Linda the full policy benefit, with interest. That allowed Linda to pay off the mortgage and begin to piece her life back together without the strain of financial insecurity.

As lawyers who specialize in the wrongful denial of life insurance claims, we see insurance companies employ these tactics every day. They will twist facts and reach unsupportable conclusions in a simple effort to avoid paying out on otherwise valid claims. While this may be a way for them to increase profits, it is a practice that can destroy the lives of beneficiaries.

If you or someone you love has had a life insurance claim denied for a reason that just doesn’t seem fair, call us today. We’ll talk over the circumstances of your case and let you know whether we believe you can successfully contest that denial. We’re here to help.

For those of you who are not familiar with the practice, it is a somewhat controversial method of sexual self gratification. During autoerotic asphyxiation (also known as “hypoxyphilia”), a person temporarily deprives the brain of oxygen. When done properly, it is said to create a feeling of euphoria and heightened sensation during the act. There are several ways that one can achieve restricted blood flow to the brain. Some of the most common methods include (1) applying pressure to the arteries in the neck that carry blood to the brain; (2) restricting airflow to the lungs; and (3) applying pressure to the veins in the neck that carry blood out of the brain.

The third method is achieved by placing minimal pressure around the neck, typically with a pliable noose. When blood is prevented from leaving the brain in this manner, the brain still tries to extract oxygen from the blood that is trapped there. It will continue to do so until oxygen is nearly depleted. Medically speaking, the practice causes two simultaneous events to occur: (1) a state of hypercapnia (an increase of carbon dioxide in the blood); and (2) a state of hypoxia (the decrease of oxygen in the blood). When these two states arise, sexual gratification is reported to increase dramatically.

Typically, a person engaging in hypoxyphilia rigs a noose system that is designed to release once the person passes out. With the pressure gone from the veins in the neck, fresh oxygen can return to the brain and the person regains consciousness quickly. Despite the fact that the use of a noose around one’s neck looks like an attempt at suicide by hanging, the purpose of this practice is not to commit suicide. Rather, as stated above, it is intended only to increase sexual gratification.

What does autoerotic asphyxiation have to do with life insurance?

As you can imagine, when people start messing with oxygen deprivation, mistakes can happen. Death during autoerotic asphyxiation is rare. Nonetheless, it is reported to occur nearly two percent of cases. When death does result, loved ones who are left behind are sometimes faced with making a claim against the deceased’s life insurance policy.

As you might guess, life insurance companies typically respond with a quick denial of claim. Let’s face it, life insurance companies don’t make money by paying out death benefits unabashedly. Rather, they profit from collecting premiums and denying claims for any reason they can think of. In cases of autoerotic asphyxiation, the insurers usually cite two bases for the denial: (1) the suicide exclusion of the policy; and (2) the exclusion for self-inflicted bodily harm.

The insurer’s attempt to characterize hypoxyphilia as suicide is nearly futile. In order for a person to commit suicide in the truest sense, they have to have intended to die. The obvious intent behind autoerotic asphyxiation is not death. To the contrary, it is sexual pleasure.

The argument that autoerotic asphyxiation can be characterized as self-inflicted bodily harm, however, has been more controversial. And, when a beneficiary receives a claim denial letter citing this policy exclusion, they sometimes have a hard time articulating why it should not apply. That is why it is so critical to contact a lawyer specializing in the denial of life insurance claims. We know that numerous courts have found that autoerotic asphyxiation does not constitute self-inflicted bodily harm and thus can help you contest your claim denial.

What the courts say about self-inflicted bodily harm

Perhaps surprisingly, cases involving life insurance claim denials due to autoerotic asphyxiation have reached some of the highest courts in the land. One case out of the 8thCircuit Court of Appeals involved a policyholder who died while practicing hypoxyphilia in the cab of his 18-wheeler. He had used a noose system that was designed to release when his body passed out from oxygen deprivation. Unfortunately, the system failed and he passed away.

His beneficiaries filed a claim for death benefits under his policy and the claim was predictably denied by the life insurance company. Specifically, the insurer claimed that the policyholder’s death was the result of self-inflicted bodily injury, which was excluded in the underlying policy. At that point, his beneficiaries made a wise move – they hired attorneys who specialize these types of life insurance claim denials.

When the case made its way to the 8thCircuit, the beneficiary’s lawyers convinced the court that autoerotic asphyxiation did not fall within the “self-inflicted bodily injury” exclusion because the temporary deprivation of oxygen to the brain was not an “injury.” Because no injury occurred, the policy exclusion did not apply and the insurer was forced to pay the claim.

A few years later, the 9thCircuit Court of Appeals faced a case with very similar facts and a very similar justification for the claim denial by the insurer. The policy at issue in that case had an exclusion for “intentional self-inflicted injury.” Using slightly different reasoning than the 8thCircuit, this Court found that death by autoerotic asphyxiation was not “intentional.” The result, however, was the same – the insurer was found to have improperly denied the beneficiary’s claim for death benefits and was forced to pay up.

New Mexico Beneficiary Disputes / New Mexico Interpleader Lawsuits

Our top life insurance lawyers handle all life beneficiary disputes and life insurance interpleader lawsuits.