Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Akin Gump: Long Term Disability Income Plan

The following are pages 486-487 in the record on appeal in Freedman v. D.C. Dept. Human Rights, D.C.C.A. no. 96-CV-961 (Sept. 1, 1998).  I obviously don't know anything about ERISA.

May 7, 1993
3801 Connecticut Ave., NW
Washington, DC  20008

Mr. Donald M. Stocks
Government of the District of Columbia
Dept. Human Rights and Minority
     Business Development
2000 14th Street, NW
Washington, DC  20009
          RE:  Docket No. 92-087-P(N)
                 Gary Freedman v. Akin, Gump, Hauer & Feld

Dear Mr. Stocks:

I enclose the attached letter for your information.  I suspect that Akin Gump's action in terminating my employment constitutes more than simply an arguable ERISA violation; my rights under COBRA are really immaterial in my case, as the letter indicates.


Gary Freedman


May 6, 1993
3801 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Washington, DC  20008

Division of Technical
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
U.S. Department of Labor
200 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Room N-5658
Washington, DC  20210

Re:  Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld Long Term Disability Income Plan ("Plan")

Dear Sir:

I have been advised that the Division of Technical Assistance/Inquiries is reviewing my query regarding the Plan.

In order to assist you in your review, I would like to provide additional facts and documents.

At the time of my termination on October 29, 1991, I was not advised of my conversion privileges under the Plan.  The only information and documentation I received upon termination concerned (1) conversion of the firm's group life insurance with Prudential, (2) election of continued medical coverage with Northwestern National, and (3) election of continued employee assistance program coverage.

Enclosed are all the documents my employer provided at the termination meeting on October 29, 1991.

Further, on October 29, 1991 my employer did not state as justification for the termination the fact that it had determined in consultation with two mental health professionals, including a psychiatrist, that I was paranoid and potentially violent.  I was apprised of this only upon my receipt on December 23, 1991 of the firm's Response to my Complaint alleging an unlawful termination filed with the D.C. Department of Human Rights.  Therefore, it was 14 months after termination that I was apprised that my employer had considered me disabled.  The plan requires a written notice of claim within 30 days of the date the disability starts.  Even if I had converted to an individual contract, the information provided by my employer at the time of the termination would have been inadequate to alert me to file a claim under the Plan.


Gary Freedman

No comments: