About the Firm
Lawyer Profiles
In the News
Practice Areas
Personal Injury
Toxic Torts
Class Action
Commercial/Consumer
Verdicts/Settlements
Golomb and Honik, P.C. attorneys at law

1 215 985 9177
1 800 355 3300

Disability Insurance
Bad Faith Claims
Consumer Protection
Defamation
Civil Rights
Site Map
Contact Us
Have a Case
Home
Disability Insurance

Disabilities vary greatly, from permanent physical injury to cognitive damage to drug or alcohol dependency. In all cases, the disabling condition impairs a person’s usual physical and/or mental function, preventing him or her from earning a living as he or she previously did. At that point, a disability insurance policy can mean the difference between maintaining one’s usual lifestyle and bankruptcy.

Unfortunately, disability insurers sometimes make it difficult for insured people to recover the payouts to which they are entitled and for which they have paid. When that happens, expedient, successful resolution is essential. The practice of Golomb & Honik’s Mark F. Seltzer focuses exclusively on this area of the law and has achieved national recognition. You can read more about Golomb & Honik’s handling of disability cases below:

  • Confidential Settlement for Injured Surgeon A surgeon who was insured against disability suffered multiple herniated discs resulting in multiple surgeries; he became totally and residually disabled in 2001. Although his condition was a serious one, he returned to work in a matter of months but was unable to perform some strenuous surgeries as before his injury. Once the waiting period on his policy expired, the surgeon made a claim on his own for residual disability benefits; the insurance company denied his claim. Golomb & Honik instituted suit on his behalf and included counts for breach of contract, bad faith, and violations of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices Act as well as other consumer laws. Golomb & Honik lawyers were able to establish bad faith on the part of the insurance company, including the way in which this individual case was handled. They also demonstrated a company-wide pattern and practice in misinterpreting their own policy language for the sole purpose of denying claims. The case settled shortly before trial for nearly ten times the compensatory claim for residual disability benefits.