Federal Judiciary

D.C. Circuit Addresses Scientific Questions About Bipolar Disorder

By Robert Loblaw

Fitts v. Unum Life Insurance, 07-7097 (D.C. Cir., March 28, 2008)

Like insurance coverage disputes, employee benefits cases are usually too dull for words. But this employee benefits case highlights an interesting scientific question: is bipolar disorder a physical or mental illness?

Jane Fitts was a lawyer for Fannie Mae until her bipolar disorder made it impossible to continue working. She filed for and received long-term disability benefits, but her carrier tried to terminate benefits after two years under a clause that limited coverage for mental illness. Fitts challenged this termination, pointing to scientific evidence that bipolar disorder is a neurological problem with physical causes.

Although the district court initially granted summary judgment for the insurance carrier, the D.C. Circuit remanded for further analysis. On remand, the district court granted summary judgment for Fitts, but that doesn?t satisfy the D.C. Circuit either. The question of what causes bipolar disorder is currently a raging debate within the scientific community, so naturally the parties? experts were divided on the issue of whether Fitts? disability has a physical cause. And even if her bipolar disorder has a physical cause, the circuits are divided as to whether disabilities with physical causes can still be treated as mental illnesses.

The D.C. Circuit acknowledges this split, but the panel has to defer this legal question for another day. That?s because the district court erred in granting summary judgment in the face of material issues of fact about causation. Accordingly, the Court remands for a trial to resolve the competing expert opinions.

Full post as published by Decision of the Day on March 28, 2008 (boomark / email).