First Unum Life Insurance Company
19 distinct federal employment cases from public court records (2000–2025)
18 trusted published court opinions analyzed; 17 map to 16 distinct cases
What public court records show
Public federal court records list First Unum Life Insurance Company as an employer in 19 distinct federal employment cases between 2000 and 2025.
Of the 18 trusted published opinions analyzed, the most common outcomes were: 5 ended in a ruling for the worker, 5 ended in a ruling for the employer, 3 were dismissed, and 3 had a mixed result.
Plaintiffs won 5 of 16 adjudicated opinions (31%).
The most common claims on record were Breach Of Contract, Failure To Accommodate, and Wrongful Termination.
Cases were filed across 8 states, most often in CA.
These figures summarize publicly available U.S. federal court records only. Most workplace disputes are resolved privately and never appear in litigation. A case outcome reflects many factors and is not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Written decisions across 16 distinct cases.
5 of 16 adjudicated opinions ended in a plaintiff win.
Does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.
Jurisdictions represented in the analyzed opinions.
About this employer
First Unum Life Insurance Company appears in 18 trusted published federal employment opinions. Recent written decisions on record:
Hardy v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America (2024) — Plaintiff Win. Hardy received long-term disability benefits from Unum Life Insurance Company but the company terminated those benefits. Hardy challenged this decision, arguing that Unum improperly denied the disability support without valid justification. Read the ruling.
Whitehouse v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America (2024) — Plaintiff Win. Dr. Whitehouse had a long-term disability insurance policy with UNUM Life Insurance Company of America. The company stopped paying her disability benefits, claiming she was no longer partially disabled and therefore no longer qualified for coverage under the policy. Read the ruling.
Desharnais v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America (2021) — Plaintiff Win. A worker had their long-term disability benefits cut off by UNUM Life Insurance Company. The employee filed a complaint, arguing the insurance company wrongfully terminated these benefits that they depended on for financial support. Read the ruling.
The published opinions primarily involve Breach of Contract (8 of 18), Failure to Accommodate (2 of 18), Wrongful Termination (2 of 18). Browse the linked claim hubs for outcome statistics and other employers facing the same allegations. Breach of Contract, Failure to Accommodate and Wrongful Termination.
Published opinions span California (4), New York (3), Minnesota (3), Tennessee (2). California is an EEOC deferral state, which extends the federal Title VII / ADA / ADEA filing deadline from 180 to 300 days. Browse state-specific employment rulings for jurisdictional patterns. California rulings, New York rulings, Minnesota rulings and Tennessee rulings.
These published opinions sit within the financial services sector, where Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank whistleblower protections often supplement standard Title VII claims.
Opinion Outcomes
Opinion Stages
18 analyzed opinions have a classified procedural stage.
Of the 5 summary-judgment opinions, 3 ended the case in First Unum Life Insurance Company’s favor and 2 let the worker’s claims continue.
What do these stages mean?
- Appeal
- A higher court reviewing an earlier decision. Many published opinions come from this stage, after a lot has already happened in the case.
- Summary judgment
- A ruling where the judge decides the case — or part of it — without a trial, because one side argues the key facts are not in dispute. For workers, getting past this step is often the biggest hurdle.
- Motion to dismiss
- An early request — usually by the employer — to throw the case out before any evidence is gathered.
- Settlement / consent decree
- The two sides resolved the dispute by agreement, sometimes with court approval. Most settlements are private and never show up in published opinions.
Published federal-court opinions only — most workplace disputes are resolved privately. This is not anyone’s odds, and not a finding that any employer violated the law.
Facing something similar? Check your rights →
Claim Types
What these numbers mean
A case is one lawsuit, identified by its court and docket number. The docket is the running court record for that same case — it is not an extra case.
A published opinion or ruling is a written court decision. One case can produce several opinions, so opinion counts and case counts answer different questions. Only trusted, reportable opinions are used in the outcome statistics on this page.
Docket entries are the individual filings inside a case — motions, orders, scheduling notices. We read them to confirm a case is real and to see where it got to, but an entry is never counted as a case or as an outcome. A single case can generate hundreds of entries.
Far fewer opinions than cases is normal. Many employment cases settle privately or close without a published opinion. No opinion here does not mean the worker lost; it means this public record does not show a reportable result.
Everything on this page comes from public federal court records. Where we are not confident a record is accurate, we leave it out rather than guess.
Federal court cases
public court recordsOne row per court+docket case · written opinions stay grouped inside their case · plaintiff names redacted
Other Finance employers
Browse trusted published opinions involving similar workplaces.
Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The presence of an employer on this page does not imply wrongdoing — many cases are dismissed or resolved without findings of liability.