Company Overview of Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc.
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc. engages in underwriting various classes of general accident insurance products including various property and liability insurance products. The company is based in Simsbury, Connecticut. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Hartford Life, Inc.
200 Hopmeadow Street
Simsbury, CT 06089
Key Executives for Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc.
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc. does not have any Key Executives recorded.
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company, Inc. Key Developments
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company Provides Updates on Lawsuit
Nov 11 13
The U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of a disability plan administrator in an action brought by a participant in an ERISA-regulated disability benefits plan for wrongful denial of a disability claim. The record contained substantial support for the administrator's determination that the participant was not disabled under the plan. Glenn Martin was a graphic designer whose job at Computer Services Corp. (CSC) required him to work on a computer most of the day, read extensively and lift up to 20 pounds. In January 2009, Martin suffered from an upper respiratory infection and experienced vertigo, dizziness, loss of balance and tremors in his hands and head. Martin stopped working in April 2009. Martin was later diagnosed by a nurse practitioner with Meniere's disease. Although Martin thereafter saw several specialists, none confirmed that diagnosis. One treating physician, an otolaryngologist, later stated that Martin's history was not strongly suggestive of Meniere's disease. Another physician diagnosed Martin with diffuse arthralgia. Martin submitted a claim for disability benefits under an ERISA-regulated employee disability plan administered by Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Co., in which he was a participant through his employment. Hartford denied the claim. After exhausting his administrative remedies, Martin sued Hartford for wrongful denial. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The district court held that the record contained substantial evidence supporting Hartford's conclusion that Martin was not disabled under the plan. Hartford was entitled to rely on the opinions of three independent consultants, diagnostic notes and opinions from two of Martin's treating physicians, surveillance footage and Martin's self-reported improving symptoms in concluding that he was able to perform the essential functions of his employment. Surveillance footage supports denial determination. The surveillance footage showed Martin engaging in light yard work for several minutes on two days without signs of dizziness or imbalance. One of Martin's treating physicians opined that his tremors and titubation were 'benign', and that his claimed level of disability was not consistent with his symptoms. Moreover, although Martin was awarded Social Security disability benefits, the record indicated that Hartford considered that award in reaching its determination and the court found that Hartford was correct in contending that the standard governing the award was different from the standards governing the award of benefits under the plan. Accordingly, the district court granted summary judgment in favor of Hartford.
Similar Private Companies By Industry
Recent Private Companies Transactions
September 30, 2014
Most Searched Private Companies
Sponsored Financial Commentaries