Skip to main content

Hackner v. Long Term Disability Plan for Employees of the Havi Group LP

7th CircuitNovember 17, 2003No. No. 03-1037Cited 3 times
Mixed ResultThe Havi Group LP
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The court reversed the district court's decision terminating Hackner's disability benefits, finding Hartford acted arbitrarily and capriciously, and ordered benefits reinstated. However, the court affirmed the district court's decisions dismissing Hartford as a party, upholding the Social Security reimbursement obligation, and affirming the reimbursement calculations.

What This Ruling Means

# Hackner v. Long Term Disability Plan: Court Ruling Summary **What Happened** Hackner received long-term disability benefits from a plan provided by The Havi Group LP. Hartford, the insurance company managing the plan, stopped paying his benefits. Hackner challenged this decision in court, arguing the company acted unfairly in cutting off his payments. **What the Court Decided** A higher court partially sided with Hackner. The court found that Hartford had made its decision to stop benefits without proper justification—essentially acting without good reason. As a result, the court ordered Hartford to restart Hackner's disability payments. However, the court upheld some other aspects of the case, including that Hackner had to repay certain Social Security benefits he had received alongside his disability payments. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case reinforces that insurance companies cannot simply deny or terminate disability benefits without sound reasoning. When a company stops paying disability benefits, workers have the right to challenge that decision in court. If a judge finds the company acted arbitrarily or unfairly, the worker may get their benefits restored. However, workers may still face obligations to repay overlapping government benefits.

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

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.