Skip to main content

Patrick v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Employee Benefits Organization Income Protection Plan

S.D. Cal.July 13, 2009No. 3:06-cr-01506Cited 1 time
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Jan M. Adler
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Failure to Accommodate

Outcome

The court granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denied defendant's motion for summary judgment in this ERISA case, finding that the claims administrator abused its discretion in denying plaintiff's long-term disability benefits claim.

What This Ruling Means

# Patrick v. Hewlett-Packard: Disability Benefits Decision **What Happened** Patrick filed a claim for long-term disability benefits through Hewlett-Packard's employee benefit plan after becoming unable to work. The company's claims administrator denied his request for benefits. **What the Court Decided** The court ruled in Patrick's favor, finding that the claims administrator acted improperly—beyond its authority—when it rejected his disability claim. The judge granted Patrick's request for the case to be decided based on documents alone, and rejected Hewlett-Packard's attempt to do the same. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case is important because it establishes that companies can't simply deny disability benefits without valid reasons. When employers or their benefit administrators make decisions about worker claims, they must follow proper procedures and have legitimate grounds for saying no. If they abuse their power to deny benefits, workers can go to court to challenge those decisions. This ruling protects employees who become disabled and depend on promised benefits to support themselves and their families.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.