TO ALL MY FELLOW AMERICANS WHO ARE INSURED! I have just gone through a ten-year court battle with the 6th largest bank in the US. This court case is the basis for a serious problem in the US that has not been address by any news agency or Newspaper. I am working on a feature story with a journalist from a local TV station regarding this case, and a major newspaper journalist. This will be a great way to reach the hometown customers of the defendant however; I would like to spread the word as far as possible to help the thousands who cannot speak for themselves. Also, to help the future thousands who are going to be in the same situation if we do not expose this corporate loophole, which destroys the lives of the most vulnerable people in our country, the disabled.

You see many news articles on TV telling the story of the poor insurance companies getting abused by the insured clients who commit fraud. These criminals collect disability payments when they are not disabled. In fact, this number of clients is less than 2% of the disabled who are able to apply for disability. The other 98% are not criminals and really are disabled. Many of them are patients of a well know doctor who treats severely disabled people who have been brain injured in an auto accident, fallen off a ladder, slipped on the ice or injured at work. When you go into this hospital, the first thing you notice is the creatively painted ceiling. The ceilings are painted with designs and pictures because most of the patients cannot sit up. They lay on a bed 24 hours a day, some able to talk, some not. The day before all of these new patients were living the lives many of us lead. Getting up for work, laughing, talking with friends and family. These patients were not aware, tomorrow they would never be able to sit up, never be able to talk, sing, laugh, walk or remember what they did yesterday.

The biggest thing they did not know was their employer is also their insurer. Most large corporations in this country are self-insured. They carry the employees of their companies under an insurance plan that they manage and fund. In many of these situations they make the decisions on who should get disability pay and who should not. 90% of disabled patients are denied disability at one point. Many of them will fight for years before they will get a dime from their insurance company, who is really their employer. The majority of doctors who deal with totally disabled patients will tell you that most of their patients will have to fight for their payments even if they are laying in a bed, unable to comprehend anything. Corporations who insure their employees are not bound by the same laws insurance companies are. You can pay your employer (insurer) disability premiums for 5 years, become totally disabled and never get a dime from the insurance policy you took out. You pay for this disability policy to protect you and your family if the worst case should happen. Your employer (insurer) can deny you benefits for 10 years with no reason and they cannot be penalized under the ERISA law. This law allows special privileges for corporations who insure their employees. One of these privileges is that they cannot be held accountable for any damage to you, your family or your future by not paying you the premiums you are entitled to. If your employer wrongfully denies your payments when you are totally disabled, the most they have to pay you is your lost wages, maybe interest and maybe legal fees.

This is the case even if 11 doctors say you are totally disabled and cannot ever work again! You could wake up tomorrow, get in a serious auto accident on your way to work, never be able to work again and the insurance policy you took you to save your home, savings account, retirement, Childs education or just money to eat and pay your bills would be gone. You would not get another dime from your employer (insurer) and you could not do one thing except hire a lawyer, spend 10 years in court with ridiculous attempts to delay, delay and delay. After you lost everything, you would win your suit, win an appeal, win another appeal and then you would have to hire a US Marshall to try and get you the money.This sounds impossible? It happens hundreds of times every day.

Check with human resources and see if your insurance premiums are going to a reputable insurance company or if your employer is insuring you. If your employer insures you, check out who makes the decisions on whether you will get paid or not. Are they paying the people on disability or do your fellow employees have to go to court to get their payments? Did they have to take a reduced settlement to get money to pay their mortgage or buy food? Ask your fellow employee,currently on disability, what their experiences have been. I was employed by one of the largest banks in the country and this happened to me. This has happened to many in my corporation. If it can happen to me it can happen to you.

Why haven't we heard about this? Because the majority of the people who are abused by this law, and the corporations who abuse it, are not able to or don't want to talk about it. They are not able to talk or endure the trauma of dealing with this abuse. The majority makes a deal with the corporate abusers and takes far less than they should get. They take far less because they have to feed their families, pay rent after they have lost their home. Pay medical bills because their auto insurer did not pay them.

Please read the following excerpt from the court order. This is just a part of the 70-page report from the judge.Please help me stop this abuse. You will know someone who will be affected by this law. This law encourages abuse of those not able to defend themselves. Hopefully, it will not be you, but if it is, you will do yourself a big favor by insuring yourself and your family against this sad situation. Unfortunately, the insurance does not come from an insurance company or your employer. It comes from your help in getting this message to as many people as you can so we can take charge of our lives. Take charge while we are able, not when our children or us are lying on our backs looking at the painted ceiling with no money to pay the bill.

Please contact me with any questions or concerns. I will do anything in my power to help you or a loved on who is suffering this abuse. As of today March 28.2005, US Bank filed an intent to appeal to the federal appeals court again. No reason was given for the appeal but the bank has offered to put 3.8 million dollars up for bond on the 2.25 million dollar judgment the court has entered against them. The U.S Marshall has been trying to collect the money owed and still has not succeeded at this time. Denise Lynn Rekstad

Jan 2005

US Bank found guilty- FINALLY!!! DISABLED EMPLOYEE GETS PAYCHECK AFTER 9 YEARS OF AVOIDANCE BY US BANK - For 10 years I have been in a horrible lawsuit with US Bancorp. They illegally took my disability benefits away when I was seriously injured in an auto accident. Then, when I was disabled and down as low as I thought I could go, they fired me. After 10 years and the devotion of a rare attorney I won. Now, I need your help to assist others are disabled and who do not have the ability to fight for what is rightfully theirs. Please read on to discover the facts of this war. As I stated below after a 10 year lawsuit and continued appeals, US Bancorp(First Bank Systems, Colorado National Bank) was found guilty of conflict of interest, and ruled arbitrarily and capriciously (Lacked evidence, Mistook the law, ruled with a conflict of interest and Lacked evidence) in denying my benefits in Jan.1996. US Bancorp was the carrier of a disability insurance plan that I paid for out of my paycheck. I did not know I was paying my employer until I lost my benefits and was fired. This happened when I was seriously injured after a head-on accident with a drunk driver. US Bank did not want to do the responsible thing and pay a very dedicated employee the benefits they deserved so they hired a huge law firm( one that was partnered by a member of their board at one time) to fight me. They paid this attorney what he laughingly called ( my case), his “lifetime annuity”. After millions of dollars spent on legal fees the US Federal court ruled in my favor. This was the 3rd time they ruled in my favor but it did not stop US Bank from fighting me. Many of the doctors and investigators in this case said they have never seen such greed and bad faith in their entire career as my case with US Bank.

US BANK found guilty of withholding disabled employees benefits Below is a copy of the letter of summary from the circuit judge hearing my case. After 10 years I hope they at least know my name.

Civil action No 97 N 1315 Denise Rekstad, Plaintiff Vs US Bank, Defendents

On Dec. 10th 2004, US District Court judgment in the above mentioned case, was entered by Judge Edward W. Nottinham. Judgment was entered in favor of the Plaintiff, Denise Rekstad, and against the Defendants, US Bank, in the amount of $2,229,325, including an award of prejudgement interest in the amount of $654.141.

On October 1991 I, Denise Rekstad, began working for FBS(known today as US BANK). US Bank was not only my employer but, unbeknownst to me, US Bank was the plan administrator and insurer of my long-term disability plan, which I paid monthly premiums on. Although Northwestern Mutual and in 1996, ITT Hartford served as US BANKs agent, US Bank maintained final decision making authority relative to the payment and termination of disability payments. On June 9, 1995 I was severely in an auto accident with a drunk driver. I was diagnosed with a broken sternum, broken ribs between my right shoulder blade and spine, shoulder, damaged nerves, torn muscles, knee and head injuries The most serious of all was a brain injury which caused significant cognitive problems. I was left with residual impairment of cognitive problems and memory loss after one year of treatment at a brain injury center. I was receiving disability payments from Northwestern mutual and US Bank at this time. . ITT Hartford then took over the disability insurance reviewing process from Northwesterm Mutual. I received a letter from them and told I was not disabled and would not longer receive benefits from my disability policy. From that day I have never received another disability payment from US Bank . On March 6th I appealed the decision to terminate my benefits. On July 30th, 1998 Judge Nottingham concluded that defendants improperly denied disability benefits and granted summary judgement for me. Judge Nottinham ruled in my favor.. US Bank appealed this decision in 1999. In 2001 the tenth circuit found that US Bank could not appeal the Judges decision. From Jan 31, 1996 to the present, I have had my medical condition extensively evaluated" I was referred to Dr Jonathon Woodcock, neurologist,psychiatrist, internal medicine doctor for help with my head injury. On June 10th , 1998 Dr Woodcock stated I had been disabled from my regular occupation and any occupation from June 1995 to present. On Jan 10th, 2000 Dr Gerber who had treated me for shoulder, back, knee, head and neck injuries since 1996 reported that based on the facts reported by Dr Woodcock and his evaluation "patient continues to be totally disabled from her regular occupation and any occupation because of chronic pain and residual cognitive problems. In September of 2000 I underwent a 3 day work performance and occupational feasibility evealution by Pat Mckenna, O.T.R for social security. Mckenna concluded that, due to plaintiffs memory problems, confusion, and pain, "it does not appear that she would be capable of returning to any typical work setting on a regular or even part time basis."

On October 2, 2001 Dr Bennett reported that this patient has difficulties with respect to attention and memory, fatigue and chronic pain. Based on the foregoing, Dr Bennett concluded that plaintiff could not return to her old job or to any type of work in competitive employment. Further, Dr Bennett noted that, with respect to plaintiff's cognitive functions. "I do not think that we will see any further improvement."

I attempted to work on 3 different occasions. On all 3 occasions I worked from home. I was hired by Norwest and fired 3 months later. I was hired at Cherry Creek Mortgage and fired 4 months later. I was hired at Chase Manhattan and after many attempts to help me overcome my cognitve problems, chases, insurance manager,. Liberty Mutual approved my disability benefits on the same medical information that US Bank denied them.

On Jan 20th, 2000 I applied for social security disability benefits as was required by Liberty Mutual .The standard of review for is is much higher that US Bank and I was still approved for disability from an accident that happened 3 years prior. ITT Hartford uses a group called the Medical advisory group to review and analyze medical findings with a disability claim. They hired a doctor from New Hampshire who should be in prison for the tactics and lies he told my doctors and friends. After reading my reports he still denied I had a disability preventing me going to work. He gave his report to ITT Hatrford and US Bank who hired him to do the report. ITT and US Bank also hired a psychologist to review my cognitive issues. Dr Zelman disagreed with my treating psychians stating their reports "lacked objective data". Based on the reports of these two doctors ITT and US Bank denied paying me my benefits as was remanded by Judge Nottingham.

On August 15, 2001 US Bank denied my disability payments. In September 2001 I appealed the decision by US Bank.

Judge Nottinham first found USBank guilty of a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest against USBank is based on the facts the plan is self funded, they are funding the plan and are the plan administrators and the plans administrators performance or level of compensation is linked to the denial of benefits. It was stated that the denial of my benefits were lacking in medical evidence, mistake of law, denied in bad faith and conflicting as US Bank gains if they deny disability benefits they are insuring.

Judge Nottinham concludes the following in his final order in Civil Case 97N1315, judgement for the plaintiff…"I find the plaintiffs treating physicians unanimous opinion and the plaintiffs examining physicians nearly unanimous opinion persuasive. I find no reason for US Banks wholesale rejection of these professional opinions in favor of the one-time report of a doctor who was no more qualified than the regular treating physicians. The defendants rejection of the reports by plaintiffs treating physicians in favor of Dr Lyons and Dr Zelman who never treated or examined Plaintiff arbitrary and capricious. Dr Lyons relies on evidence which is irrelevant. Dr Lyons conclusion is a SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE. Dr Lyons engaged in selective review in order to reach a conclusion that would result in USBank denying disability benefits . INCONSISTENCIES RIDDLE DR LYONS REPORT. Dr Lyons statement in his report appears, at best, to be a DISTORTION OF MEDICAL EVIDENCE.

Judge Nottinham concluded that Dr Zelmans report for US Bank as not reliable. Dr Zelmans reliance on Dr Thompsons questionable validity is a further indication of the UNRELIABILITY OF DR ZELMANS REPORT.

On December 29th the Honorable Judge Edward Nottinham ruled my favor for all back pay and reinstatement of benefits.

Please read on to discover the facts of this war with US BANK. As I stated, after a 10 year lawsuit and continued appeals, US Bancorp(First Bank Systems, Colorado National Bank) was found guilty of conflict of interest, and ruled arbitrarily and capriciously (Lacked evidence, Mistook the law, ruled with a conflict of interest and Lacked evidence) in denying my benefits in Jan.1996. US Bancorp was the carrier of a disability insurance plan that I paid for out of my paycheck. I did not know I was paying my employer until I lost my benefits and was fire. This happened when I was seriously injured after a head-on accident with a drunk driver. US Bank did not want to do the responsible thing and pay a very dedicated employee the benefits they deserved so they hired a huge law firm( one that was partnered by a member of their board at one time) to fight me. They paid this attorney what he laughingly called ( my case), his “lifetime annuity”. After millions of dollars spent on legal fees the US Federal court ruled in my favor. This was the 3rd time they ruled in my favor but it did not stop US Bank from fighting me. Many of the doctors and investigators in this case said they have never seen such greed and bad faith in their entire career as my case with US Bank.

In US Bancorps code of ethics it is very specific about confict of interest: The following text is directly quoted from their ethics code. Ethics Quick Test U.S. Bank values integrity and wants to maintain its reputation for doing the right thing. If you are ever in a situation where the right thing is unclear, ask for clarification or examine your options with the Ethics Quick Test:

· Could it harm U.S. Bank's reputation? · Is it legal and is it the right thing to do? · How would it look in the newspaper or on the news? · How would my friends, family, the community or shareholders view it? · Is it consistent with U.S. Bank's values, policies and guidelines? · Should I check? U.S. Bank's reputation, and your conscience and good name, are far too valuable for you to do anything that would not pass the Ethics Quick Test. In a nutshell, this means that all of us must tell the truth and fulfill our promises. And we must treat all stakeholders - fellow employees, customers, suppliers, shareholders and our communities - with honesty and respect.

U.S. Bank Ethical Principles · Uncompromising Integrity: doing the "right thing" without compromise for our customers, suppliers, and shareholders - even when circumstances make it difficult. We are clear, truthful and accurate in what we say and do. · Respect: treating one another with respect and dignity; appreciating the diversity of our workforce, our customers and our communities. · Responsibility: taking accountability for ethical decisions and actions; asking for clarification when necessary and reporting concerns or violations in the workplace. · Good Citizenship: complying with the spirit and intent of the laws that govern our business; contributing to the strength and wellbeing of our communities.

Conflict of Interest It is a conflict of interest if you have an interest outside of work that interferes with your responsibilities to U.S. Bank or affects your ability to perform your duties properly. You must avoid conflicts of interest and potential conflicts of interest, including situations where there might be an appearance that there is, or could be, a conflict of interest.

Waivers of the Code Waivers of the U.S. Bank Code of Ethics and Business Conduct, whether implicit or explicit, are generally prohibited. No waivers of the Code may be granted to executive officers and directors without approval by the Board of Directors, and any such waiver will be publicly disclosed. No waivers of the Code may be granted to other employees without approval by the CEO.

The following is a summary of the judges decision. My hope is that the public will be come aware of this news worthy case. This blatant snuffing of employees who are injured, disabled and unable to fight for themselves is happening everyday. It happens at all corporations who are self insured, which is the majority,.. I was very lucky to have a lawyer who believes in helping people that are being taken advantage of. Many people do not have the ability to even talk to an attorney, yet alone testify. All these disabled people need you to help them spread this story to stop the abuse of Corporate Greed. As you all know US BANK does not care about their employees, However, You probably couldn't imagine even them doing this.

Civil action No 97 N 1315

Denise Rekstad, Plaintiff Vs US Bank, Defendents

On Dec. 10th 2004, US District Court judgment in the above mentioned case, was entered by Judge Edward W. Nottinham. Judge Nottinham ordered that Plaintiffs motion for Summary Judgment is Granted and Defendents motion for summary judgment is denied. Judgment was entered in favor of the Plaintiff, Denise Rekstad, and against the Defendants, US Bank, in the amount of $2,229,325, including an award of prejudgement interest in the amount of $654.141. This award will go on to include legal fees and complete reinstatement of disability benefits. The case has been in review and appeal for 10 years. The following information relates to the case and how it evolved. The majority of this information can be found in the Order and Memorandum of Decision entered by Judge Nottinham on April 2, 2004.

Background On October 1991 I, Denise Rekstad, began working for FBS(known today as US BANK). During this time I was straight commissioned loan officer whose position includes evaluating technical material, financial reports, laws and regulations and customer relations. I had many years experience in this field and graduated from college with a BA in international business while employed at US BANK. US Bank was not only my employer but, unbeknownst to me, US Bank was the plan administrator and insurer of my long-term disability plan, which I paid monthly premiums on. The policy was presented to employees, as a policy by Northwestern Mutual. I did not know US Bank was the administrator and insurer until much later. Although Northwestern Mutual and in 1996, ITT Hartford served as US BANKs agent, US Bank maintained final decision making authority relative to the payment and termination of disability payments. On June 9, 1995 I was severely in an auto accident with a drunk driver. I was diagnosed with a broken sternum, broken ribs between my right shoulder blade and spine, shoulder, damaged nerves, torn muscles, knee and head injuries. These injuries were diagnosed with bone scan, EMG, MRI, x ray, CT, Discogram, pet scan, cognitive testing, psychological testing and multiple surgeries. The most serious of all was a brain injury which caused significant cognitive problems.I was treated by Dr Bennett at the Brain Injury Center of Colorado for one year. At one year I was released after reaching my maximum level of rehabilitation. I was left with residual impairment of cognitive problems and memory loss. US Bank did not agree with Dr. Bennett and my neurologist, Dr Tamara Miller.

I was receiving disability payments from Northwestern mutual and US Bank at this time. . On Jan. 1996 US Bank cancelled the agreement with Northwestern Mutual and retained ITT Hartford to act as the agent in the disability claims policies US Bank had insured. In January 1996, shortly after ITT and US Bank entered into a contract, I received a letter from them and I was told I was not disabled and would not longer receive benefits from my disability policy. From that day I have never received another disability payment from US Bank even though I was approved for Social security Disability based on the same set of circumstances US Bank denied my benefits. Social Security disability benefits have a higher standard of review that my policy with US Bank. On March 6th after contacting an attorney I appealed the decision to terminate my benefits. In my appeal I attached medical records and reports from my treating physicians, none of whom believed that I could return to work at this time. Despite the treating physicians opinions US Bank upheld its decision and denied my benefits. After the denial I filed a civil action seeking judicial review of denial of benefits under ERISA, more than the wages, and possibly interest and legal fees, no matter what they do.

On July 30th, 1998 Judge Nottingham concluded that defendants improperly denied disability benefits and granted summary judgement for me. Subsequent to that order, the attorney for US Bank, From Jan 31, 1996 to the present, I have had my medical condition extensively evaluated. I was found totally disabled by 6 different doctors. On Feb 6, 1996 I attempted to work on 3 different occasions. I was hired by Norwest and fired 3 months later. I was hired at Cherry Creek Mortgage and fired 4 months later. I was hired at Chase Manhattan and after many attempts to help me overcome my cognitve problems and memory lapses my manager said I could not handle the position and I went on leave while applying for disability benefits from Chase. Chase Manhattan has Liberty Mutual Insurance manage the disability Insurance for its employees. After Liberty Mutual examined my medical records they gave my full disability benefits. Liberty Mutual approved my disability benefits on the same medical information that US Bank denied them.

On Jan 20th, 2000 I applied for social security disability benefits as was required by Liberty Mutual. The standard of review for ss is much higher that US Bank and I was still approved for disability from an accident that happened 3 years prior. ITT Hartford uses a group called the Medical advisory group to review and analyze medical findings with a disability claim. Why they could not find a doctor in MN or CO that could examine the records and me is beyond me. They hired a doctor from New Hampshire who should be in prison for the tactics and lies he told my doctors and friends. After Dr Lyons wrote the report that ITT and US Bank wanted his to write he was given a position at ITT Hartford.***************. Dr Lyons wrote 5 reports regarding my medical condition. He did not talk to me nor did her examine me at any time. Dr Lyons reported He gave his report to ITT Harford and US Bank who hired him to do the report. ITT and US Bank also hired a psychologist to review my cognitive issues. He did not talk to me or examine me at any time. On August 15, 2001 US Bank denied my disability payments as remanded by the court. Not only did US Bank deny by disability payments but it also concluded that I did not qualify for rehabilitative employment that is stated in US Banks plan description that “ US Bank encourages you to go back to work and will pay you an adjusted LTD benefit when you participate in rehabilitative employment.

In September 2001 I appealed the decision by US Bank. In addition to the medical reports from Dr’s Bennett, Woodcock, Gerber, Miller, Brenton, Mckenna I submitted medical tests which verified my nerve damage, torn muscles, discograms, x-rays and affidavits verifying my condition and failed work history. I also submitted a report from Dr Gerber stating the discrepancies Dr Lyon described at length. Dr Miller asserted in a response to Dr Lyons report that she did not feel there was a lack of motivation on my part to get better. Dr Woodcock completely disagreed with Dr Lyons and all of his conclusions. Pat Mckenna, The social security review occupational therapist, stated Dr Lyons was a great :WRITER OF FICTION!’ he was selective in his retrieval of information from medical records, that Dr Lyons TWISTED AND MISREPRESENTED KEY MEDICAL INFORMATION FROM PLAINTIFFS RECORDS AND WAS WRONG IN SUGGESTING THAT THE PLAINTIFF DID NOT PUT FORTH A GOOD EFFORT IN HER TESTING”. Dr Bennett stated, “I have seen many patiences wrongfully denied insurance payments but I have never seen anyone persecuted the way they are persecuting you.” Despite the medical evidence, affidavits and doctor reports US Bank said they did not see evidence to support I was disabled at any time and I was capable of working full time.

On Dec 6, 2002 I filed a motion to have the court reopen the case. On Feb 20th 2002 US Bank had their attorney, Steve Merker file to have the court deny me summary judgment. Judge Nottinham reviewed the case based on the evidence being Arbitrary and capricious. This is very important, as this standard is harder to prove fault and I have to prove they denied benefits based on “lack of substantial evidence. Mistake of law, bad faith and conflict of interest. Judge Nottinham first found USBank guilty of a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest against USBank is based on the facts the plan is self funded, they are funding the plan and are the plan administrators and the plans administrators performance or level of compensation is linked to the denial of benefits. It was stated that the denial of my benefits were lacking in medical evidence, mistake of law, denied in bad faith and conflicting as US Bank gains if they deny disability benefits they are insuring. Judge Nottinham concludes the following in his order…”I find the plaintiffs treating physicians unanimous opinion and the plaintiffs examining physicians nearly unanimous opinion persuasive. I find no reason for US Banks wholesale rejection of these professional opinions in favor of the one-time report of a doctor who was no more qualified than the regular treating physicians. The defendants rejection of the reports by plaintiffs treating physicians in favor of Dr Lyons and Dr Zelman who never treated or examined Plaintiff arbitrary and capricious. Dr Lyons relies on evidence which is irrelevant. Dr Lyons conclusion is a SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE. Dr Lyons engaged in selective review in order to reach a conclusion that would result in USBank denying disability benefits . INCONSISTENCIES RIDDLE DR LYONS REPORT. Dr Lyons statement in his report appears, at best, to be a DISTORTION OF MEDICAL EVIDENCE. Judge Nottinham concluded that Dr Zelmans report for US Bank as not reliable. Dr Zelmans reliance on Dr Thompsons questionable validity is a further indication of the UNRELIABILITY OF DR ZELMANS REPORT. Another troubling aspect of US Banks denial is they do not provide an explanation as to why the plaintiff was disabled on Jan 26th, 1996 and not on Feb 1,1996. There is not a scintilla of evidence that on Feb 1, 1996 plaintiff was not totally disabled. I hope you can help me reach the thousands who are not as lucky as me by making this newsworthy story available to all who can possible benefit or know someone who can benefit.

Please read the brief summary of the 10 yr abuse by US BANK. Civil action No 97 N 1315 Denise Rekstad, Plaintiff VS US BANK, DEfendants On Dec. 10th 2004, US District Court judgment in the above mentioned case, was entered by Judge Edward W. Nottinham. Judgment was entered in favor of the Plaintiff, Denise Rekstad,in the amount of $2,229,325, including an award of prejudgement interest in the amount of $654.141.In October 1991 I began working for US BANK.US Bank was not only my employer but, unknown to me, US Bank was the plan administrator and insurer of my long-term disability plan, which I paid monthly premiums to ITT Hartford, served as US BANKs agents, US Bank maintained final decision making authority relative to the payment and termination of disability payments. In June 1995 I was severely injured in an auto accident with a drunk driver. I was receiving disability payments from US Bank. In JAN 1996 I received a letter from them and told I was not disabled and would not longer receive benefits from my disability policy.On March 6th I appealed the decision. In July 1998 Judge Nottingham concluded that defendants improperly denied disability benefits and granted summary judgement for me.US Bank appealed this decision in 1999. For over 8 years I have had 11 doctors evaluate me.They all found disabling status for me. I attempted to work on 3 different occasions. On all 3 occasions I worked from home.I was hired by Norwest and fired 3 months later.I was hired at Cherry Creek Mortgage and fired 4 months later. I was hired at Chase Manhattan and Chases' insurance manager, Liberty Mutual approved my disability benefits.On JAN 2000 I applied for social security disability benefits.I was approved for disability US Bank hired a doctor from New Hampshire who should be in prison for the tactics and lies he told my doctors and friends. After reading my reports he still denied I had a disability preventing me going to work. US Bank also hired a psychologist to review my cognitive issues. Dr Zelman disagreed with my treating doctors stating their reports “lacked objective data”.Based on the reports of these two doctors ITT and US Bank denied paying me my benefits.In September 2001 I appealed the decision by US Bank .Judge Nottinham first found USBank guilty of a conflict of interest.Conflict of interest against USBank is based on the facts the plan is self funded, they are funding the plan and are the plan administrators and the plans administrators performance or level of compensation is linked to the denial of benefits.It was stated that the denial of my benefits were lacking in medical evidence, mistake of law, denied in bad faith and conflicting as US Bank gains if they deny disability benefits they are insuring. Judge Nottinham concludes the following in his final order in Civil Case 97N1315, judgement for the plaintiff”I find the plaintiffs treating physicians unanimous opinion and the plaintiffs examining physicians nearly unanimous opinion persuasive. I find no reason for US Banks wholesale rejection of these professional opinions in favor of the one-time report of a doctor who was no more qualified than the regular treating physicians.The defendants rejection of the reports by plaintiffs treating physicians in favor of DrLyons and Dr Zelman who never treated or examined Plaintiff arbitrary and capricious. Dr Lyons relies on evidence which is irrelevant.Dr Lyons conclusion is a SERIOUS MISREPRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE. Dr Lyons engaged in selective review in order to reach a conclusion that would result in USBank denying disability benefits. INCONSISTENCIES RIDDLE DR LYONS REPORT. Dr Lyons statement in his report appears, at best, to be a DISTORTION OF MEDICAL EVIDENCE. Judge Nottinham concluded that Dr Zelmans report for US Bank as not reliable. On December 29th the Honorable Judge Edward Nottinham ruled my favor for all back pay and reinstatement of benefits. Denise Rekstad