Material Misrepresentation on Application Sufficient to Rescind Disability Policy
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gNG9mvy2 and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/ggJeijGW and at https://lnkd.in/gHPQDW7Q and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4300 posts.
Plaintiff Bradley McKinney applied for and obtained a disability insurance policy with Plaintiff and counterclaim Defendant, Provident Life Accident & Insurance Company (“Provident Life”). He made claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. McKinney subsequently filed a claim for disability benefits under the policy, but Provident Life rejected his claim on the ground that McKinney made material misrepresentations in his application for the policy. Provident Life sued under ERISA seeking rescission of the insurance policy, and McKinney counterclaimed seeking an order directing Provident Life to pay him all benefits due under the policy.
In Provident Life & Accident Insurance Company v. Bradley D. McKinney, No. 3:19-CV-1325 (SVN), United States District Court, D. Connecticut (September 9, 2022) the USDC resolved the Dispute.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The parties agree on the following basic facts:
McKinney’s employer, Anderson Tax LLC, maintained a Supplemental Individual Disability Insurance Plan.
Relevant here, the plan permitted eligible employees to apply for a combination of three types of coverages: long-term disability benefits, which Defendant refers to as “Guaranteed Standard Issue,” and which the Court will refer to as “basic disability benefits”; catastrophic disability coverage (“catastrophic coverage”); and an option to convert the basic disability benefits into long-term care coverage (“long-term care coverage”).
An employee could apply for any individual or combination of these coverages on the same form.
McKinney applied for supplemental insurance through the plan. In completing the application, McKinney answered various questions about his medical history and agreed that his answers were “true and complete and correctly recorded to the best of [his] knowledge and belief. In September of that year, Provident Life issued him an insurance policy providing all three coverages. The policy provided that “[o]missions and misstatements in the application could cause an otherwise valid claim to be denied or [the policy] to be rescinded.”
In August of 2018, McKinney filed a claim for basic disability benefits related to a neurocognitive disorder. He first began experiencing symptoms of “confusion, severe fatigue, loss of memory, challenges with thinking, analyzing, [and] lack of concentration” in February of 2016.
Provident Life’s claims specialist investigated McKinney’s claim, obtained certain medical records, and consulted with the underwriters. Thereafter, Provident Life denied McKinney’s claim and notified him that it was rescinding its policy on the ground that McKinney had materially misrepresented his medical history when applying for the insurance. McKinney filed an appeal, and, after obtaining more of his medical records, Provident Life concluded that it had properly rescinded the policy.
McKinney untruthfully represented his medical history on the application for insurance coverage in two ways.
1 in answering questions 6 and 8, he represented that he had not received diagnosis or treatment from a physician for memory loss, confusion, or speech disruption in the five years preceding his application.
2 in answering question 3(a), he represented that he had not missed one or more days of work or been admitted to a medical facility due to sickness or injury in the 180 days preceding his application. Upon reviewing McKinney’s medical records, Provident Life concluded that his answers to those questions were untruthful and that its denial of his claim and rescission of his policy were proper.
ERISA
The parties do not dispute that a plan fiduciary may obtain equitable rescission of an ERISA-governed insurance policy that is procured through the material misstatements or omissions of the insured.
Rescission Due to Material Misrepresentation
Under the federal common law that has developed pursuant to ERISA an insurer can rescind a policy where the insured knowingly made a material misrepresentation in an application for an ERISA-governed insurance policy. Thus, Provident Life will be entitled to summary judgment if it demonstrates that there is no genuine dispute that (1) McKinney made a misrepresentation, (2) knowingly and (3) that was material to its decision to issue the insurance policy.
DISCUSSION
As noted, Provident Life rejected McKinney’s claim for basic disability benefits and subsequent appeal on the ground that he untruthfully represented his medical history on the application for insurance coverage. Provident Life identified two of McKinney’s responses that were allegedly untrue, warranting rescission of the policy.
The Court found no genuine dispute of fact that McKinney made material misrepresentations in responding to questions 6 and 8 of his application for supplemental insurance coverage. McKinney contended that the “primary condition” for which he was treated during the 2016 hospitalization was cancer related to the mass on his chest, and that his confusion and speech disruption were merely symptoms of that cancer. McKinney also contended, however, that any misrepresentations in his responses to questions 6 and 8 were innocent because “he was not aware that he had been diagnosed with or treated for memory loss, confusion or speech issues.
The Court concludes that any ignorance on McKinney’s part that he had been treated for confusion and speech disruption during his 2016 hospitalization was not innocent. Indeed, when questioned in the course of his claim for benefits, he acknowledged that he was first diagnosed with these problems in February of 2016. The idea that he did not know about them when he applied for the insurance policy in 2017, therefore, strains credulity.
The USDC concluded that there was no genuine dispute that McKinney’s untrue answers to questions 6 and 8 were material to Provident Life’s issuance of the policy. Courts have repeatedly explained that certain information requested by the insurer and provided by the applicant for insurance coverage is presumptively material. [Mt. Airy Ins. Co., 928 F.Supp. at 176 (citations omitted). Accord Paul Revere Life Ins. Co. v. Pastena, 52 Conn.App. 318, 323, cert. denied, 248 Conn. 917 (1999); Continental Cas. Co. v. Bank of S.E. Conn., No. 2:91CV326 (PCD), 1995 WL 871829, at *1 (D. Conn. June 22, 1995).]
McKinney’s knowing misrepresentations were material to Provident Life’s issuance of the policy. Accordingly, McKinney was well informed that his answers to questions 6 and 8 would become part of the insurance policy he received and thus were material to Provident Life’s issuance of the policy. The application’s particular inquiry into the applicant’s prior treatment for memory loss, confusion, or speech disruption renders those questions presumptively material.
USDC May Not Rewrite the Policy
It is not the role of the Court to rewrite the terms of the insurance agreement to conform to the newly disclosed facts. Given the strong weight of authority establishing the materiality of an applicant’s prior medical history subject to specific inquiry, as well as the fact that McKinney’s answers were incorporated into the policy issued, the Court concluded that his knowing misrepresentations to questions 6 and 8 were material. Thus, Provident Life was entitled to rescission of the insurance policy as a matter of law.
ZALMA OPINION
This is a classic case of “I didn’t know the gun was loaded” defense when a person intentionally shoots another. In this case McKinney knew the true facts of his condition both during and after his cancer treatment and lied on the application he submitted for ERISA Disability insurance. He claimed the lie was innocent but the evidence reviewed by the USDC established he was neither innocent nor ignorant, he just lied. Therefore, the court affirmed Provident’s rescission of the ERISA policy.
(c) 2022 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and [email protected].
Subscribe and receive videos limited to subscribers of Excellence in Claims Handling at locals.com https://zalmaoninsurance.locals.com/subscribe.
Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling at https://barryzalma.substack.com/welcome.
Now available Barry Zalma’s newest book, The Tort of Bad Faith, available here.
The new book is available as a Kindle book, a paperback or as a hard cover.
Write to Mr. Zalma at [email protected]; http://www.zalma.com; http://zalma.com/blog; daily articles are published at https://zalma.substack.com.
Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/
Convicted Criminal Seeks to Compel Receiver to Protect his Assets
Post number 5291
See the video at and at and at https://www.zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
The Work of a Court Appointed Receiver is Constitutionally Protected
In Simon Semaan et al. v. Robert P. Mosier et al., G064385, California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, Third Division (February 6, 2026) the Court of Appeals applied the California anti-SLAPP statute which protects defendants from meritless lawsuits arising from constitutionally protected activities, including those performed in official capacities. The court also considered the doctrine of quasi-judicial immunity, which shields court-appointed receivers from liability for discretionary acts performed within their official duties.
Facts
In September 2021, the State of California filed felony charges against Simon Semaan, alleging violations of Insurance Code section 11760(a) for making...
When There are Two Different Other Insurance Clauses They Eliminate Each Other and Both Insurers Owe Indemnity Equally
Post number 5289
In Great West Casualty Co. v. Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Co., and Conserv FS, Inc., and Timothy A. Brennan, as Administrator of the Estate of Pat- rick J. Brennan, deceased, Nos. 24-1258, 24-1259, United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit (February 11, 2026) the USCA was required to resolve a dispute that arose when a tractor-trailer operated by Robert D. Fisher (agent of Deerpass Farms Trucking, LLC-II) was involved in a side-impact collision with an SUV driven by Patrick J. Brennan, resulting in Brennan’s death.
Facts
Deerpass Trucking, an interstate motor carrier, leased the tractor from Deerpass Farms Services, LLC, and hauled cargo for Conserv FS, Inc. under a trailer interchange agreement. The tractor was insured by Great West Casualty Company with a $1 million policy limit, while the trailer was insured by Nationwide Agribusiness Insurance Company with a $2 million ...
Opiod Producer Seeks Indemnity from CGL Insurers
Post number 5288
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/guNhStN2, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gYqkk-n3 and at https://lnkd.in/g8U3ehuc, and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5250 posts.
Insurers Exclude Damages Due to Insured’s Products
In Matthew Dundon, As The Trustee Of The Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust v. ACE Property And Casualty Insurance Company, et al., Civil Action No. 24-4221, United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania (February 10, 2026) Matthew Dundon, trustee of the Endo General Unsecured Creditors’ Trust, sued multiple commercial general liability (CGL) insurers for coverage of opioid-related litigation involving Endo International PLC a pharmaceutical manufacturer.
KEY FACTS
Beginning as early as 2014, thousands of opioid suits were filed by governments, third parties, and individuals alleging harms tied to opioid manufacturing and marketing.
Bankruptcy & Settlements
Endo filed Chapter 11 in August 2022; before bankruptcy it ...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lost the ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah. Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and wonder how did all these wonderful things come into being. Jews believe the force we call G_d created the entire universe and everything in it. Jews feel G_d is all seeing and knowing and although we can’t see Him, He is everywhere and in everyone.We understand...
Passover for Americans
Posted on February 19, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/passover-americans-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-5vgkc.
“The Passover Seder For Americans”
For more than 3,000 years Jewish fathers have told the story of the Exodus of the enslaved Jews from Egypt. Telling the story has been required of all Jewish fathers. Americans, who have lived in North America for more than 300 years have become Americans and many have lostthe ability to read, write and understand the Hebrew language in which the story of Passover was first told in the Torah.
Passover is one of the many holidays Jewish People celebrate to help them remember the importance of G_d in their lives. We see the animals, the oceans, the rivers, the mountains, the rain, sun, the planets, the stars, and the people and ...
You Get What You Pay For – Less Coverage Means Lower Premium
Post number 5275
Posted on January 30, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video at and at
When Experts for Both Sides Agree That Two Causes Concur to Cause a Wall to Collapse Exclusion Applies
In Lido Hospitality, Inc. v. AIX Specialty Insurance Company, No. 1-24-1465, 2026 IL App (1st) 241465-U, Court of Appeals of Illinois (January 27, 2026) resolved the effect of an anti-concurrent cause exclusion to a loss with more than one cause.
Facts and Background
Lido Hospitality, Inc. operates the Lido Motel in Franklin Park, Illinois. In November 2020, a windstorm caused one of the motel’s brick veneer walls to collapse. At the time, Lido was insured under a policy issued by AIX Specialty Insurance Company which provided coverage for windstorm damage. However, the policy contained an exclusion for any loss or damage directly or indirectly resulting from ...
