In Time Warner Lawyer's Suicide, Circuit Upholds Life Insurance Policies' Exclusion Clauses
The Third Circuit said the mere details of the lawyer's death were sufficient circumstantial evidence to show that she knew her actions would end her life.
September 19, 2019 at 09:36 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New Jersey Law Journal
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has affirmed a ruling that an insurance company is not obligated to pay $3.5 million from two life insurance policies in the name of a Time Warner lawyer who committed suicide.
Christine Arena ended her life at age 41 at her family's home in Upper Montclair. Her husband, Gianfranco Arena, sued the RiverSource Life Insurance Co., claiming its policy exclusions for suicide should not apply because Christine Arena was taking psychotropic medications at the time of death that left her unable to understand the consequences of her actions or to form the requisite intent to kill herself.
But the Third Circuit said the mere details of her death were sufficient circumstantial evidence to show that she knew her actions would end her life. The appeals court, acknowledging the assertion of a plaintiff's expert that Christine Arena's medications may have caused her to act impulsively and obfuscated her ability to form the requisite intent, said that "acting on an irresistible impulse is different than having no intent or no comprehension of the actions one is taking."
Christine Arena graduated from Fordham Law School in 1999, then worked for six years at Cravath, Swaine & Moore in New York before joining Time Warner. Lawyers from Cravath represented her family in the insurance dispute.
Christine Arena and her husband were experiencing financial difficulties at the time of her death. They owed $60,000 in back taxes to the Internal Revenue Service, and the sale of their existing home had fallen through after they already had purchased a new one for $1.3 million.
After the sale fell through, she began seeing a psychiatrist, Lester Noah Shaw. The doctor found she did not fit the criteria for clinical depression and was at a low risk of suicide, but he prescribed her Clonazepam and Sertraline, the generic versions of Klonopin and Zoloft. Later, the doctor increased her dose for both medications and then added a prescription for another antidepressant, Trazodone.
Christine Arena was rushed to a hospital after hanging herself in April 2015 and died nine days later. The police listed the incident as a suicide attempt and the medical examiner listed the manner of death as suicide.
U.S. District Judge Jose Linares dismissed the underlying lawsuit in December 2018. On appeal, Third Circuit Judges Michael Chagares, Kent Jordan and L. Felipe Restrepo acknowledge Gianfranco Arena's assertion that a policy exclusion for suicide only applies if a decedent intended to cause his or her death.
But the actions leading up to Christine Arena's death are sufficient to establish "not only that Arena had awareness that those actions would end her life but also that she intended to do so," Jordan wrote for the court. RiverSource was not required to produce direct evidence in the form of a suicide note or contemporaneous expression of her intentions.
Gianfranco Arena argued that his wife's mental state was akin to a situation described in Johnson v. Metropolitan Life Insurance, a 1968 Third Circuit case establishing that killing oneself does not always include the element of intent. He claimed that his wife's mental disorder was so extreme, she had no comprehension of what she was doing. He cited testimony from family and friends that she would never end her own life if she had been thinking clearly. But the Third Circuit judges said that evidence of her mental state being inconsistent with suicide, as well as her moral aversion to suicide, are not legally material. That evidence "does not undermine the undisputed facts which can only be explained as an effort to kill herself," the panel said.
Kevin Orsini and Rory Leraris of Cravath, who represented Gianfranco Arena, did not respond to requests for comment about the ruling. Jay Blumenkopf and Sara Frey of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani represented RiverSource. Blumenkopf declined to comment on the ruling.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInsurance Company Sues Over 180 Health Care Providers for Fraud Under RICO
3 minute readNew York Court of Appeals Tightens Pleading Standards Against Insurance Policyholder
7 minute readAmid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readGE Agrees to $362.5M Deal to End Shareholder Claims Over Power, Insurance Risks
2 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250