Facts

Plaintiff Kathy Dine worked as an aircraft mechanic for Boeing North American. She claimed that in January 1998 she injured her right shoulder while on the job. The plaintiff asserted that she was unable to work, and the pain gradually increased. By June, the plaintiff experienced severe pain and numbness in her right arm, and was unable to grip with her right hand. In July, the plaintiff's physician advised her not to handle objects weighing over 20 pounds. Further, the plaintiff was informed that she could not perform any work, which required her to use her right shoulder.

The plaintiff claimed that she later suffered further injuries. She fell down some stairs and injured her tailbone and back. Her chiropractor opined that the plaintiff experienced pain when she stood for an extended period of time. Her doctor stated that the plaintiff had pain in her knees, which was aggravated by sitting.

The plaintiff obtained benefits pursuant to the Boeing Extended Disability Benefits Plan, a defendant. Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., which served as the administrator and insurer, requested that the plaintiff provide documentation to substantiate her claim for continued benefits. The plaintiff submitted reports from her doctor and chiropractor, as well as an MRI report of her spine.

According to defendant MetLife's physician consultant, the plaintiff's reports did not support a finding of total disability. Consequently, the plaintiff's claim for extended disability benefits was denied in March 2001. The defendant also denied the plaintiff's appeal. The defendant asserted that the plaintiff's documentation did not indicate that she was undergoing regular treatment for her injuries. Further, the plaintiff failed to show that she was incapable of working in another occupation. The plaintiff brought an action against defendant MetLife and a number of Boeing's disability plans.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff contended that defendant MetLife abused its discretion in violation of ERISA when it denied the plaintiff disability benefits. The defendant failed to secure an independent medical evaluation.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS:
The defendants contended that the plaintiff's disability benefits were properly denied. Her documentation did not support her claim for continued benefits. The only treatment she was receiving was pain medication. Her doctor even admitted that the plaintiff visited him only once a year, which entailed him refilling her prescriptions and updating her disability paperwork. The plaintiff's chiropractor opined that he had not treated her since July 1999, and that he could not state with certainty that she was totally disabled.

Damages

The plaintiff sought a declaration from defendant MetLife that she was totally disabled. Further, she claimed back disability benefits in the amount of $17,000, and an unspecified sum to cover future benefits.

Result

A judge held that the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of total disability. Thus, the defendant did not abuse its discretion, and the plaintiff was awarded nothing.