GOVERNMENT BENEFITS CASES

• Mote v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.
• Kirby v. Astrue
• Kirby v. Astrue
• Andino v. Nicholson

U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 12, 2007
Mote v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., No. 06-4127
In a suit challenging the termination of plaintiff's long-term disability benefits, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the plan's decision to terminate plaintiff's benefits was neither arbitrary nor capricious; and 2) the plan was not estopped from terminating plaintiff's benefits based upon the Social Security Administration's subsequent finding that plaintiff was disabled under its regulations. Dismissal of plaintiff's claims against a second defendant is affirmed where the defendant was not a proper party to the action. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 11, 2007
Kirby v. Astrue, No. 063998
In an action arising from an application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under the Social Security Act, the district court's reversal of the Commissioner's denial of benefits is reversed and judgement is entered in favor of the Commissioner where the ALJ permissibly found that plaintiff's impairments were not severe, and that plaintiff was not disabled. Read more...

U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, September 11, 2007
Kirby v. Astrue, No. 06-3998
In an action arising from an application for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income under the Social Security Act, the district court's reversal of the Commissioner's denial of benefits is reversed and judgement is entered in favor of the Commissioner where the ALJ permissibly found that plaintiff's impairments were not severe, and that plaintiff was not disabled. Read more...

U.S. Fed. Circuit Court of Appeals, September 10, 2007
Andino v. Nicholson, No. 06-7313
Severance of a veteran's service connection is reversed where the Veterans Court's interpretation of the regulation governing severance as permitting severance on the basis of a physician letter that did not consider all the evidence accumulated and considered by the VA in granting the original service connection was erroneous. Read more...