Life Insurance Lawyer New York

Whether you reside in: Mount Vernon; New Rochelle; Albany; Syracuse; Yonkers; Rochester; Buffalo; New York City or Manhattan; our life insurance attorneys who live and work here in New York are here to help resolve your delayed or denied life insurance claim.

Does undisclosed alcoholism prevent life insurance payouts?

It is a stark reality of modern life that many people turn to alcohol and other substances in order to dull the stressors of daily living. For some people, substance use quickly turns into substance abuse. In truth, however, very few people actually seek medical treatment for drug and alcohol abuse.

In part, this resistance to seeking help may be due to embarrassment. People don’t like to admit that they have problems. Indeed, while some people do seek the help of a medical professional for substance abuse, they may still hide the problem in other areas of their lives. As one couple in Montana found out recently, this sort of hiding can lead to a whole host of other problems.

Our firm specializes in the wrongful denial of life insurance claims. Thus, this article explores the potential consequences that can arise when a policyholder (or the applicant for a policy) fails to disclose alcoholism or other substance abuse to his or her life insurance company. While the case we’ll discuss ended up favorably for the policyholder and his beneficiary, this issue is getting more and more attention from life insurers and the courts.

A “forgotten” detail in a policy application

A man named Joel and his wife Sara had a home loan with a local bank in Montana. When the couple sought to increase the amount of that loan, the bank required that each of them obtain a life insurance policy that would cover the full amount of the loan if one of them were to die before the loan was paid off.

Joel and Sara agreed to obtain the required life insurance policy. In fact, they completed the insurance application inside their local bank branch with a bank officer verbally asking them questions about their health and other factors that might impact their insurability. Truthfully, the application was quite short compared with other life insurance applications. The bank officer asked each individual two key questions:

Have you been hospitalized or sought the advice of a physician for any medical condition during the last three years?

Have you ever been diagnosed with or treated for heart disease, lung disease, kidney disorders, high blood pressure, cancer, tumors, or diabetes?

Both Joel and Sara answered “no” to each question. If either had given a “yes” answer, the application would have required the banker to elicit additional health information. Given the couple’s firm denials, however, the banker simply asked each individual to sign a statement swearing that the answers they had given were truthful to the best of their knowledge.

A few weeks later, the life insurance company issued $100,000 policies on both Joel and Sara. Each policy contained a “period of contestability” of two years’ duration. Essentially, that meant that if either person died within two years of the policy issuance, the insurance company had a right to dig into their past medical records to determine whether they had lied in their policy application. At that time, no one believed that policy language would ever become an issue for the couple.

An unfortunate ending

Just over a year and a half after Joel and Sara received the life insurance policies, Joel died as the result of a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. A police investigation and autopsy led authorities to believe that Joel had shot himself accidentally while he was highly intoxicated. Indeed, Sara admitted to police that Joel had been drinking beer for approximately 10 hours before the tragic accident occurred.

Notwithstanding her devastation, Sara gathered all the paperwork necessary to submit a claim to the couple’s life insurance company. The full claim submission included the following:

Police reports, which included Sara’s witness statement

The autopsy report, which revealed that Joel was suffering from an enlarged liver, and

The coroner’s report, which listed Joel’s official cause of death as “accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound due to extreme alcohol intoxication.”

Given that Joel’s death occurred during the period of contestability, the life insurance company decided to do a full investigation into Joel’s medical history before they would issue a decision on Sara’s claim. During that investigation, the insurer discovered that one year prior to the date of the couple’s life insurance application, Joel had sought medical treatment for alcoholism.

In light of this information, the life insurer denied Sara’s claim for benefits. The company contended that: (a) Joel had lied in the insurance application when he said he had not sought the advice of a physician for “any medical condition” during the three years prior to the application; and (b) had the insurance company known the truth about Joel’s alcoholism, it never would have issued him a life insurance policy.

Although the reasoning for the denial made sense to Sara, she still sought the advice of an attorney who specialized in the wrongful denial of life insurance claims. It’s a good thing she did. The attorney took the life insurance company to court and made two key arguments: (1) that Joel didn’t consider his alcoholism to be a “medical condition” that had to be disclosed; and (2) that if the insurance company found alcoholism to be a sufficient reason to deny coverage, it would have listed it among the conditions in the second question on the application.

Based on those arguments, the court sided with Sara and awarded her the $100,000 death benefit, plus interest, which she then used to pay off the loan to the bank. Sara remarked at the close of the case that she had no idea how she would have ever paid off the loan without the court’s ruling.

As lawyers who specialize in the wrongful denial of life insurance claims, we know that Sara’s case is not unusual. If you are facing a claim denial that gives you the least bit of pause, call us today. We’ll assess your case and do our best to get you the death payout your loved one intended for you.

New York denied life insurance claims are nothing new. Existing for many years, life insurance policies have been used to safeguard families and friends alike in case emergencies or accidents come unexpectedly. Unfortunately, denials of life insurance claims, as well as delays, are commonplace.
Our life insurance lawyers who live and work in New York can help, whether you are in: Manhattan; New York City; Buffalo; Rochester; Yonkers; Syracuse; Albany; New Rochelle; Mount Vernon; or anywhere in the state of New York, we will get you the benefits to which you are entitled.
New York Life Insurance Law
Policies through work are governed under ERISA. The primary regulating force here in New York is New York Consolidated Law, and oversight is provided by the New York State Department of Financial Services.
Most Common Reasons for a Denied Life Insurance Claim in New York
  • Number one is a misrepresentation on the application. This typically involves failing to disclose a medical condition. However, we can get over this hurdle the majority of the time.
  • A lapse of a life insurance policy is probably second most common. What happens is that the insured gets sick and misses a payment or two. These are tough, but often we can get these claims paid.
  • Probably third is the type of death exclusion. This could be a suicide or it could be a self-inflicted injury. Murder is another exclusion. Health again can fall under this exclusion. We often win suicide exclusions as we cite case law that the death was actually accidental.
  • A very common exclusion is the alcohol exclusion. The insured may have been killed in a car crash, but the autopsy revealed alcohol in the person’s system. We have many legal briefs to combat this exclusion.
  • Heroin and opiates or illegal drug exclusion is one of the biggest now. With the opioid crisis, there are tens of thousands of deaths.
  • Prescription drug overdose exclusion may involve an overdose of medicine or taken medicines that are contraindicated.
  • An ex-spouse being cut off from life insurance benefits is a big one. We actually have a half dozen ways to get over this hurdle.
  • Having a spouse not listed as a beneficiary is another reason for denial
  • Having a child not listed as a beneficiary is one too.
  • Having only a primary beneficiary who is deceased is another.
  • On an AD&D (accidental death and dismemberment) life insurance policy, a fall not being considered an accident is extremely common.
  • The insured’s age not being correct on the initial application is a reason for denial.
  • Having the wrong social security number listed is common.
  • An autoerotic asphyxiation exclusion is an easy one for us to beat.
  • An omission on the application is a big reason for denying a life insurance claim, but we have legal briefs to this effect.
  • Not providing the required documents to the insurance company after death is a reason.
  • Information which is argued to not be correct is one.
  • When there is a dispute between two or more beneficiaries, an interpleader may occur, and we always get these resolved quickly.
  • A beneficiary not named is a reason for not paying it out.
  • A life insurance policy may be transferred from one company to another by the employer which causes major problems.
What if a new life insurance policyholder dies before the formal policy is written?
Is there such a thing an oral contract for insurance?
For many people, obtaining life insurance is just one part of an overall estate planning strategy. Unfortunately, many people avoid thorough planning until late in life, when life insurance policies can be difficult and costly to obtain.
That was certainly the case for one Iowa couple who sought life insurance when the husband (Wayne) was 76 and the wife (Alice) was 74. Wayne and Alice owned a large farm in Iowa that they intended to leave to their two children, Gary and JoAnn, when they died. In discussing estate planning strategies, their financial planner suggested that the couple obtain life insurance policies to cover things like inheritance taxes that Gary and JoAnn would need to pay when the couple died.
It sounds like a great strategy, right? Well, it was until things went sideways. In this article, we explore how life insurance companies will play games and twist the truth in an effort to avoid paying valid claims – especially when an insured dies shortly after a policy is obtained. Specifically, we’ll examine the facts of a lawsuit that Gary and JoAnn were forced to bring after their mother’s life insurer denied them death benefits. Their case went all the way to the Supreme Court, where they eventually prevailed against the insurance company.
As lawyers who specialize in the denial of life insurance claims, we see illegitimate claim denials all the time. We study cases like those brought by Gary and JoAnn and use them to help us successfully contest bogus claim denials that impact our clients. As you read the facts and outcome of this case, you’ll see why we’re so focused on every legal development in the area of life insurance claim denials.
Sound financial planning
By all outward accounts, Wayne and Alice Jones were a successful couple. They raised a family and, over time, amassed a family farm that covered over 500 acres. By the time the couple reached their 70s, their son Gary was running the farm with help from his sister JoAnn.
Realizing that they may not have too many years left, Wayne and Alice contacted a financial planner to make sure their estate was in optimum shape for their surviving children. The planner recognized that while the two kids would benefit greatly from inheriting the farm (as called for in the Jones’ will), the children would also be saddled with large inheritance taxes.
Thus, the financial planner suggested that Wayne and Alice obtain a life insurance policy naming Gary and JoAnn as the beneficiaries. The planner had the couple fill out “trial applications” for a $300,000 policy that would only pay out when the last surviving spouse passed away.
After reviewing the trial applications, the life insurance company deemed Wayne uninsurable. Nonetheless, they were willing to take a risk on Alice. The insurer requested that Alice fill out a second policy application for death benefits paying between $300,000 and $400,000. In filling out the second application, Alice left several questions blank, choosing instead to write “all taken care of on trial app” at the top of the page.
The couple was later notified that the annual premium on Alice’s policy would be $21,000. Wayne wrote a check for $5,300 to cover the quarterly premium. Upon taking the check, the life insurance representative handed over a “conditional receipt” which was a perforated form at the bottom of the application. Both Wayne and Gary recalled the representative saying that the conditional receipt was “evidence that Alice had a policy.”
Much to everyone’s surprise, Alice died just a few weeks later. Understanding that the conditional receipt was evidence of Alice’s life insurance policy, Gary and JoAnn made a claim for death benefits. The claim was promptly denied by the life insurer. It claimed that: (a) Alice’s second application was incomplete; and (b) due to the incomplete application, the insurer had not yet had time to put a written policy in place. Because no written policy existed, the insurer claimed in was not responsible for paying any death benefits.
Life insurance policies can be formed by oral contracts
Fortunately, Alice’s children refused to accept the life insurer’s denial of claim. Instead, they contacted a lawyer who specialized in contesting illegitimate denials of such claims. While Gary and JoAnn prevailed against the insurance company at trial, the insurer appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court of Iowa. Ultimately, the state’s highest court also sided with Gary and JoAnn.
The court found that when the life insurance representative accepted Wayne’s quarterly premium payment, handed over the conditional receipt, and said that receipt was evidence of Alice’s policy, the insurance company formed an oral contract to provide life insurance coverage for Alice. Given that oral contracts are valid in Iowa, the life insurance company was forced to pay the death penalty on Alice’s policy. Also, because the life insurer’s claim denial was deemed to have been made intentionally and in bad faith, the court awarded Gary and JoAnn punitive damages above and beyond the policy limits.
Do not hesitate to find a specialized attorney
If you are a life insurance beneficiary whose claim has been denied on a similar basis – or on any basis at all – please do not hesitate to contact an attorney specializing in life insurance claim denials. We successfully contest claim denials day in and day out. We are familiar with life insurance company lawyers and we know first-hand the convoluted reasons they like to give for denying valid claims. Let’s face it, they get paid for doing just that. Fortunately, we’ve never met a life insurance attorney who intimidated us in the slightest way.
After you practice this area of the law for years on end, you start to see patterns in claim denials. We can handle your case quickly, efficiently, and always with an eye toward maximum recovery. Call us today to talk about your claim denial. We’re here to help.