Opinion
1:22-cv-05787
12-01-2023
KENNETH SLAUGHTER Plaintiff v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY Defendant
Warren von Schleicher, HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP Attorney for Defendant
Warren von Schleicher, HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP Attorney for Defendant
HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY'S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT UNDER FED. R. CIV. P. 52(a)
Jeremy C. Daniel, Judge
Defendant, HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY (“Hartford”), by its attorney Warren von Schleicher of Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP, submits its Motion for Entry of Judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a):
1. Plaintiff Kenneth Slaughter (“Slaughter”) was employed by The Boeing Corporation as a computer systems engineer at Boeing's St. Louis office. As a benefit of employment, he received disability coverage under the Boeing's long-term disability plan (the “Plan”), pursuant to a group policy issued by Hartford and governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §1001 et seq. (“ERISA”).
2. The parties stipulated that this case is properly adjudicated under Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a) by applying ERISA's de novo standard of judicial review, based on the evidence in the stipulated administrative record.
3. The Plan provides benefits for up to 24 months if the participant is disabled from working in “Your Occupation.” There is no dispute that Slaughter's Occupation is properly classified as sedentary.
4. Slaughter claimed to be unable to work in his sedentary Occupation since August 25, 2020 because of his heart condition. Slaughter's heart condition, however, significantly improved after implantation of the ICD (similar to a pacemaker). His cardiologist opined that as of February 2021, Slaughter was able to perform light level work activities, which exceeds the physical functional requirements of his sedentary Occupation.
5. Slaughter has no medical evidence from his treating physicians beyond January 2021. Adjudication under Rule 52(a) is akin to a bench trial on the written evidence, which in this case consists of the stipulated administrative record. As in a bench trial, when the plaintiff fails to proffer evidence to satisfy his burden of proof, like Slaughter in the present case, judgment should be entered for the defendant under Rule 52(a).
6. Slaughter failed to prove he continuously satisfied the Plan's Your Occupation definition of Disability from February 23, 2021 thorough the end of the Your Occupation benefit period on February 22, 2023.
7. Judgment, therefore, should be entered for Hartford under Rule 52(a), including an award of Hartford's reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §1132(g).
WHEREFORE, defendant HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY respectfully requests entry of final judgment in its favor pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 52(a), dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice, and an award of its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §1132(g) and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.