Opinion ID: 3050437
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Investigation and Termination of Benefits

Text: Hartford initiated surveillance in March 2006 “[t]o better understand [Howard’s] capabilities.” R at 995. A total of 60 hours of surveillance was conducted over six days: March 30 to April 1 and May 8-10, 2006. The surveillance showed Howard running errands for extended periods of time, driving approximately 248 miles over one day, driving her daughter to and from school, sitting in her vehicle for 33 minutes, carrying groceries, and walking with and without her cane. A Hartford investigator interviewed Howard, who gave a detailed statement regarding her condition, restrictions, and limitations. In her interview, she reiterated that she was prevented from working by chronic pain, she suffered “extreme fatigue” because of her fibromyalgia, she was not able to sit for more than one hour, she was able to stand only for 5 to 10 minutes and walk for 5 to 10 minutes, she could drive for only 30 minutes or less and not farther than 15 to 20 miles, and she used a cane to walk “90% of the time.” R at 2482-90. Subsequently, Hartford sent Howard’s medical records, surveillance video, and surveillance reports to Dr. William Sniger, a Board-certified Physician in 6 Case: 13-11619 Date Filed: 04/15/2014 Page: 7 of 16 Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. After reviewing the file, Dr. Sniger made several observations, including that the activities seen in the video were “in excess of [Howard’s] stated limitations,” and “the preponderance of objective information does not appear to support the severity of the claimant’s subjective symptoms or alleged inability to perform full-time work.” R at 1013, 1014. Dr. Sniger concluded: “Based upon the subjective and objective information available to me, it is my opinion with a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the preponderance of information does not support the claimant’s alleged inability to perform full-time work from a physical perspective.” R at 1014. In a letter dated November 15, 2006, Hartford terminated Howard’s LTD benefits. The letter detailed the information within Howard’s file and explained, after considering all of the evidence, “the combined information . . . d[id] not show that [Howard] [was] unable to perform the Essential Duties of [her] Occupation.” R at 1002.