David A. Kirk v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company

942 F.2d 504, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 18993, 1991 WL 156522
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedAugust 19, 1991
Docket90-2322
StatusPublished
Cited by40 cases

This text of 942 F.2d 504 (David A. Kirk v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
David A. Kirk v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, 942 F.2d 504, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 18993, 1991 WL 156522 (8th Cir. 1991).

Opinions

JOHN R. GIBSON, Circuit Judge.

David A. Kirk appeals from the district court’s 1 determination that he is not enti-[505]*505tied to recover benefits under the terms of his health care plan in this action filed pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(1)(B) (1988). We affirm.

On May 1, 1988, Kirk became a covered participant in a health care benefits plan for employees of Tyson Foods, Inc., which was set up under the provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 (1988) (ERISA), and administered by appellee Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company. In July 1988, Kirk was diagnosed as suffering from bacterial endocar-ditis and underwent surgery to replace his aortic valve. Provident denied his resulting claim for medical benefits under an exclusion in the policy which provided that “[n]o benefits [were] payable for expenses due to any Injury or Illness beginning before the effective date of the coverage.” App. 45. Provident found that although Kirk’s problem was not diagnosed until after he became covered under the policy, the medical records indicated that the endocar-ditis was a pre-existing condition, that is, it began prior to the effective date of coverage. Kirk filed suit in the Circuit Court of Marion County, Arkansas, and Provident removed the case to federal district court.

The district court reviewed the denial of benefits de novo in accordance with Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 115, 109 S.Ct. 948, 956-957, 103 L.Ed.2d 80 (1989). Accord Harper v. R.H. Macy & Co., 920 F.2d 544, 545 (8th Cir. 1990). Although the case was governed by federal law, the parties agreed that in interpreting the terms of the policy the district court could adopt by analogy, the standard for determining whether a condition is pre-existing under Arkansas law,2 as set forth in State Nat’l Life Ins. Co. v. Stamper, 228 Ark. 1128, 812 S.W.2d 441 (1958), as follows:

the weight of authority is that the sickness should be deemed to have had its inception at the time it first manifested itself or became active, or when sufficient symptoms existed to allow a reasonably accurate diagnosis of the case, so that recovery can be had, even though the disease, germs or infection was [sic] present in the body prior to the excluded time, if the condition was latent, inactive, and perhaps not discovered.

Id. at 1129, 312 S.W.2d at 442.

The district court, agreeing with Provident, found that although the endocarditis was not diagnosed until after the effective date of the policy, the infection began prior to the effective date. The district court concluded that under the terms of the policy, the relevant inquiry was when the illness began, not the point of diagnosis. Thus, the exclusion was properly invoked and Kirk was not entitled to payment under the policy.

Like the district court, we must review the denial of benefits de novo. Harper, 920 F.2d at 545. The record on appeal includes Kirk’s medical records as well as the deposition testimony of Kirk’s various treating and consulting physicians. The record shows that Kirk was examined by Dr. Henry Kirby on March 1 and 2,1988, at which time he complained of a constant pain in his right flank, night sweats, and an ache in his right leg. Dr. Kirby noted that Kirk had a heart murmur, which was probably congenital. In addition, Kirk’s white blood count and temperature were elevated, indicating the presence of an infection. Dr. Kirby prescribed antibiotics and Kirk’s symptoms were temporarily alleviated. On March 20, Kirk developed a pain in the elbow and his temperature became elevated. When Dr. Kirby examined Kirk on March 22, he noted a redness, swelling and tenderness of the medical cubital vein and again prescribed antibiotics. Kirk was examined by Dr. Kirby once more on March 23, by which time Kirk had developed a lesion on his left knee. At that time, Dr. Kirby suspected that Kirk’s symptoms might have been caused by congenital heart disease, which can cause a bacterial vegetation or growth in the lining of the [506]*506heart. A blood culture, however, did not produce a bacterial growth.

Kirk was relatively symptom-free during April and May. In June he had problems with swelling in his hand and knee, headaches, and an elevated temperature. He was admitted to the hospital on July 15, 1988, and an echocardiogram was done, which showed a vegetation on his aortic valve. Kirk’s doctor at that time, Dr. Tom Leslie, referred Kirk to a heart specialist, Dr. Brian Barlow. Dr. Barlow identified Kirk’s illness as bacterial endocarditis, an infection of the heart valve, and referred Kirk to Dr. Doyne Williams, who conducted the surgery on July 22, 1988. In Dr. Barlow’s opinion, Kirk’s medical history indicated that the infection had probably been present for about three months prior to surgery. Dr. Barlow explained that with endocarditis, blood cultures often grow bacteria if the patient has not been treated with antibiotics; antibiotic treatment suppresses the growth so that the bacteria, although present, will not grow in a culture. Thus, while there was no objective data to confirm a diagnosis of endocarditis until the echocardiogram was done, the flu-like symptoms, high white blood cell count, swelling, and fever, were indications that the infection was present.

Dr. Roberta Monson, a specialist in infectious diseases who examined Kirk during his hospitalization, agreed that Kirk’s history of intermittent fevers, night sweats, the skin lesion, the aches and pains, and several episodes that suggested that emboli had broken off the infection and had gone to different parts of his body, were consistent with a diagnosis of endocarditis. When asked to state to a reasonable degree of medical certainty when the endocarditis began, Dr. Monson testified that based upon the medical history given to her by Kirk and his wife, Kirk had been sick for approximately three months.

On appeal, Kirk argues that ERISA violates the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution because it takes away the right to a trial by jury, and that the district court erred in determining that his condition was pre-existing as that term is defined in Stamper. Kirk agrees that the date of diagnosis is not the focus of the inquiry, but argues that his symptoms were not sufficient to allow a reasonably accurate diagnosis of endocarditis prior to the effective date of the policy, and therefore, the exclusion did not apply.

After de novo review of the evidence and the Arkansas law defining “pre-existing condition” we agree with the district court that benefits were properly excluded under the policy. As explained in Lincoln Income Life Ins. Co. v. Milton, 242 Ark. 124, 412 S.W.2d 291 (1967), the cases in which the insured’s right to protection under Stamper have been upheld have been cases in which “the insured had some supposedly trivial infirmity or abnormality when the policy took effect.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

General Collection Co. v. Leaman
Nebraska Court of Appeals, 2023
Loeffelholz v. Ascension Health, Inc.
73 F. Supp. 3d 1064 (E.D. Missouri, 2014)
Rice v. ADP Totalsource, Inc.
936 F. Supp. 2d 951 (N.D. Illinois, 2013)
Boddicker v. ESURANCE INC.
770 F. Supp. 2d 1016 (D. South Dakota, 2011)
Goetz v. Greater Georgia Life Insurance
649 F. Supp. 2d 802 (E.D. Tennessee, 2009)
FUTAMURA ESTATE OF FUTAMURA v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of America
305 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (W.D. Washington, 2004)
GSA, Inc. v. Strong
1998 ME 235 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1998)
Salameh v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance
23 F. Supp. 2d 704 (S.D. Texas, 1998)
McWilliams v. Capital Telecommunications Inc.
986 F. Supp. 920 (M.D. Pennsylvania, 1997)
Burkett v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada
958 F. Supp. 432 (E.D. Arkansas, 1997)
Alton Cash v. Wal-Mart Group Health Plan
107 F.3d 637 (Eighth Circuit, 1997)
Alton Cash v. Wal-Mart Group
Eighth Circuit, 1997
Gentile v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance
951 F. Supp. 284 (D. Massachusetts, 1997)
Fath v. Unum Life Insurance Co. of America
928 F. Supp. 1147 (M.D. Florida, 1996)
Kracht v. Aalfs Associates H.C.P.
905 F. Supp. 604 (N.D. Iowa, 1995)
Golden Rule Ins. v. Atallah
First Circuit, 1995
Golden Rule Insurance v. Atallah
45 F.3d 512 (First Circuit, 1995)
Pitcher v. Principal Mutual Life Insurance
870 F. Supp. 903 (S.D. Indiana, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
942 F.2d 504, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 18993, 1991 WL 156522, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-a-kirk-v-provident-life-and-accident-insurance-company-ca8-1991.