Willie Searcy and Susan Miles v. Texas University Health Plan, Inc. et al.

Few things could be more frightening than your employer’s insurance company telling you that they would no longer pay nor permit you to care for your disabled son in your home; instead, they planned to relocate your son hundreds of miles away in a facility with questionable care.


Federal ERISA law places large discretion with insurance company’s benefit decisions. It was essential to couple the law with the underlying medicine to create a picture of gross injustice by the insurance company – all done to prevent payment of benefits owed.


Through testimony of Willie’s treating physician and devastating cross-examination (including presentation of a horrible death rate of the proposed facility), the Ayres Law Office sought injunctive relief so the Miles family could keep Willie in his home with the care he deserved, effectively requiring the insurance company to have court approval prior to making benefit decisions.


The court, in its opinion, described our client as “passionate” and the “exception to the rule,” while framing the tactics of the Defendant as “laughable,” “shocking,” “more than a little bit suspect,” and so bad that the “stink of bad faith” was “unbearable.”  Not surprisingly, a permanent injunction was entered requiring specific care and treatment of our client’s son and requiring