Chandhok v. Companion Life Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 25 August 2021 |
Docket Number | CIV 19-00362 JB/JFR |
Citation | 556 F.Supp.3d 1192 |
Parties | Paul CHANDHOK, Plaintiff, v. COMPANION LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
James Rawley, James Rawley Law Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for the Plaintiff.
Scott D. Sweeney, Joshua Bachrach, Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker, LLP, Denver, Colorado, Attorneys for the Defendant.
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Plaintiff's Petition for an Award of Attorney's Fees, filed September 17, 2020 (Doc. 33)("Motion"); and (ii) the Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for an Award of Attorneys Fees and Costs, filed November 24, 2020 (Doc. 39)("Memo."). The Court held a hearing on October 5, 2020. See Clerk's Minutes at 1, filed September 29, 2020 (Doc. 36). The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiff Paul Chandhok, as the requesting party, achieved some degree of success on the merits, and thus is eligible for an award of attorney's fees; (ii) whether the factors that the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit considers in the award of attorney's fees under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1), support the award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs; and (iii) whether § 1132(g)(1) authorizes a court to award attorney's fees for work done before litigation commences in a United States District Court. The Court concludes that: (i) Chandhok is eligible for reasonable fees and costs, because his success in having his claims remanded to Defendant Companion Life Insurance Company ("Companion Life") for further consideration, and his success in arguing that the disability policy language covers him beyond his final full day at work, constitute some degree of success on the merits; (ii) the five factors that the Tenth Circuit considers in an award of attorney's fees under ERISA weigh in Chandhok's favor, because (a) Companion Life acted culpably in its denial of Chandhok's claims; (b) Companion Life is able to satisfy an award of reasonable fees and costs; (c) an award of fees will deter Companion Life and other ERISA plan administrators from acting in a similar manner; and (d) Companion Life's later motion for reconsideration does not raise sound arguments, thus making an award in Chandhok's favor appropriate; but (e) Chandhok's suit is not brought on behalf of a broad section of plan beneficiaries nor does it resolve a broader question regarding ERISA; and (iii) the Court will not award fees for work done before the start of litigation in a United States District Court, because such an award runs counter to both § 1132(g)(1) ’s plain language and the Congressional purpose of ERISA. Accordingly, the Court: (i) grants in part and denies in part the motion; (ii) grants in part and denies in part the Memo.; and (iii) awards Chandhok $47,163.60, because this amount is an appropriate award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred after litigation commenced in the Court.
As it has done in the past, the Court recites the factual background as stated in Memorandum Opinion and Order, Chandhok v. Companion Life Ins. Co., 478 F. Supp. 3d 1157 (D.N.M. 2020) (Browning, J.), filed August 13, 2020 (Doc. 30)(" MOO I") as neither party has objected to the Court's recitation of facts in the MOO I. The footnotes associated with the quoted text are also quoted in full from the MOO I. See MOO I, 478 F. Supp. 3d at 1161-65.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
L. L. v. Anthem Blue Cross Life
...1125 (D. N.M. 2021). Thus, “absent the threat of a fee award [plan administrators] face few consequences following the denial of a claim.” Id. Accordingly, an award of attorney fees can serve as a deterrent for plan administrators and help encourage them to evaluate a claim fully. Id. The f......