Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Gingras v. Prudential Insurance Company of America

April 4, 2007


The opinion of the court was delivered by: Matthew F. Kennelly, District Judge


Patrick Gingras brings this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), to contest Prudential Insurance Company of America's denial of his claim for long term disability benefits. The parties have cross-moved for summary judgment. The parties have also stipulated that should the Court find that genuine issues of material fact preclude summary judgment for either party, the Court may enter judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52. For the following reasons, the Court denies the parties' motions for summary judgment and declines to enter judgment on the parties' written submissions.


Patrick Gingras was employed as a financial services advisor with Bank One Corporation (now JPMorgan Chase & Co.) at its credit card operation in Elgin, Illinois. As a financial services advisor, Gingras worked forty hours per week handling telephone inquiries from customers regarding their credit card accounts. Gingras participated in Bank One's long-term disability plan, which is insured and underwritten by Prudential. The plan provided Gingras with a monthly benefit of 70% of his salary should he become permanently disabled.

Gingras stopped working on May 27, 2003. He submitted a claim for short-term disability benefits, claiming that he suffered from depression, panic disorder, HIV/AIDS, sleep apnea, and back pain. After waiting the required 182-day elimination period, the period after a disability begins but before benefits are available, Gingras applied for long-term disability benefits. On October 21, 2003, Prudential denied Gingras' claim because, it contended, the medical evidence submitted by Gingras' treating physicians did not provide evidence of an impairment that would prevent him from performing his duties as a financial services advisor.

Prudential's plan provides for two internal appeals of a denial of benefits. On June 2, 2004, Gingras filed his first appeal. Gingras provided Prudential with narrative reports from the following individuals: Dr. Frank Pieri, psychiatrist; Dr. Michael Friedman, ear, nose, and throat specialist; Dr. David Blatt, HIV/AIDS physician; Dr. Warren Jablonsky, orthopedic surgeon; and Richard McCoy, chiropractor.

Dr. Pieri diagnosed Gingras with generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and panic disorder without agoraphobia. With regard to Gingras' ability to work, Dr. Pieri wrote that [i]n general, Mr. Gingras has a number of medical conditions that, in combination with his psychiatric condition, make it quite difficult for him to perform [his] job duties . . . . Specifically, the number of hours per day and consecutive days worked place a great deal of stress on him and thereby exacerbate his psychological symptoms . . . . These psychological difficulties would make it more problematic for him in terms of his attention and concentration, decreased memory, increased fatigue, and difficulty focusing; and increased anxiety would also clearly impair his ability to focus and concentrate.

At times, when he was working, he may possibly have been able to perform these duties with some reasonable accommodations as defined within the ADA guidelines. My understanding is that his employer was either unwilling or unable to accommodate him. This situation exacerbated his symptoms and caused him to become more and more anxious, have increased panic attacks, and experience increased depressive symptoms to such a degree that he was no longer able to work. Since that time, after approximately a year of intensive treatment, including some intensive outpatient hospital treatment, he has begun to stabilize; but clearly, this has occurred only recently and with this, any additional stress clearly exacerbates his symptoms.

Pl. Ex. 6, Tab K.

Dr. Friedman, who treated Gingras for severe obstructive sleep apnea, stated that in late 2003 Gingras began falling asleep during the day. By the end of November 2003, Gingras had "severe daytime somnolence that was incapacitating." Id., Tab P. Dr. Friedman opined that because of the sleep apnea, Gingras "is not capable of functioning or maintaining any full time employment." Id., Tab M. Dr. Friedman continued, [w]ith regard to his ability to function at work, I would offer the following guidelines -- he is not capable of maintaining continuous wakefulness in order to [sic] phone calls or to interact with customers on a continuous basis. He obviously has intermittent episodes of strength and somnolence, which alternate and cannot be predicted. His poor level of alertness makes him a poor candidate for tracking phone calls. He would not be able to advise team manager of call-type trends. ....

Overall, I will summarize his condition as being that of severe fatigue and daytime somnolence which are generalized conditions. Therefore, he is not employable at the present time. His prognosis is poor due to his terminal condition.


Dr. Blatt wrote that Gingras "suffers severe depression and anxiety and is under the care of a psychiatrist. He continues to refuse treatment of his HIV, but is on a plethora of medication for the above problem and for nausea and hyperacidity. He does also have evidence of a mild right ulnar neuropathy which could adversely affect his ability to do the duties outlined at his computer." Id., Tab L.

Dr. Jablonsky stated that [a]t this time his current limitations inherent to his medical condition with regard to his work would include only essentially the ability to prevent continued pressure to the medial aspect of his right elbow in the region of the ulnar nerve anterior transposition. Otherwise if he may perform occasional stretching exercises or repositioning of the elbow at times to relieve any of this pressure, he should be allowed or continued to work. ....

Regarding your inquiry of his ability to answer incoming telephone calls related to credit card inquiries or disputes, I would anticipate that he should be able to continue with his activities. If he has ongoing or worsening ulnar nerve symptoms or if ergonomic suggestions are not successful then he may have difficulty performing this job repetitively over a ten-hour period during the day. Regarding the remainder of your listed inquiries, I see no problem with his continued performance of those activities. He should be able to perform sitting tasks without significant limitation for the pertinent diagnoses that I am treating. Id., Tab M.

Richard McCoy, Gingras' chiropractor, wrote that "[i]f the stress-emotional was not a factor and still the eye complaint, I feel that Mr. Gingras could perform his work duties as before even though he had a ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.