A Brain Injury Is Not a Mental Illness — Federal Court Rules in Favor of Chevron Worker With TBI
Dorian Law frequently represents clients in complex Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) disputes against massive corporations and their insurance administrators. We are proud to announce a significant victory for our client, Mr. Daniel Cobb, in his fight for disability benefits against Chevron Corporation and their administrator ReedGroup.
Proving Post-Concussive Syndrome is a neurological disability through science based evidence.
On This Page
On October 1, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California entered judgment in Mr. Cobb’s favor in a long-term disability (ERISA) case against Chevron and its claims administrator, ReedGroup. Dorian Law successfully argued two primary points:
Chevron’s administrator, ReedGroup, had no right to a lenient “abuse of discretion” standard of review. We won a strict “de novo” review—a crucial procedural victory that leveled the playing field.
The administrator wrongfully denied Mr. Cobb’s claim by re-characterizing his severe, physical Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) as a “mental illness” to exploit a 24-month limitation in the plan.
This case is a masterclass in how insurers deny valid claims and how expert legal strategy can overcome those tactics.
“My Insurer Says My Physical Injury Is a Mental Health Issue. What Can I Do?” - The Story of Daniel Cobb
Your doctor says you can’t work. You’ve paid your disability insurance premiums for years. Yet, a letter arrives from a claims administrator you’ve never met, filled with confusing jargon, telling you your benefits are terminated. It’s a devastating moment, and for Daniel Cobb, a dedicated Chevron plant operator, it was his reality. Mr. Cobb suffered a life-altering Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), yet the administrator, ReedGroup, attempted to deny his claim by mischaracterizing it as a pre-existing mental health issue to exploit a loophole in the plan. This tactic is not an isolated error; it is a deliberate strategy some insurers use to cap their financial liability by reclassifying long-term physical injuries as short-term mental health conditions, which often have more restrictive payout limits.
This is the story of how Dorian Law stepped in to fight this injustice. We recognized the administrator’s strategy and systematically dismantled it, securing a crucial victory for Mr. Cobb. This article will break down how we won and what you can learn from this victory if you are facing a similar battle. Our goal is to provide the clarity and hope you need when confronting a wrongful disability denial, demonstrating a people-first approach to complex legal challenges.
What Was This Case About?
Our client, Mr. Cobb, was a loyal plant operator for Chevron. In 2017, while on approved short-term disability for work-related stress, he was in a catastrophic motorcycle accident that was not his fault. He suffered a severe traumatic brain injury (TBI), a subarachnoid hemorrhage, and was in a coma for ten days.
Chevron’s plan administrator, ReedGroup, approved his claim for long-term disability (LTD) benefits based on this clear physical and neurological injury. They paid his benefits for over 24 months.
Then, they abruptly terminated his benefits.
Their reason? They claimed Mr. Cobb’s disability was not his TBI, but rather “a mental/behavioral health condition”. Because the Chevron plan, like many disability plans, limits benefits for mental illness to 24 months, ReedGroup argued he had exhausted his benefits.
They took a clear, physical, life-altering brain injury and called it a “mental illness” to save money.
Our First Battle: Winning the “Standard of Review”
Before we could even argue the facts of the TBI, we had to win a critical fight over the standard of review. This is the single most important factor in most ERISA cases.
What Chevron Wanted: “Abuse of Discretion” Review. This is a weak, deferential standard that heavily favors the insurer. The court can only ask if the administrator’s decision was “reasonable”—even if it was wrong. Insurers almost always win under this standard. Chevron’s lawyers argued the Plan gave ReedGroup this discretionary power.
What We Fought For: “De Novo” Review. This is a strong, fair standard that means “from the beginning.” It empowered the judge to review all the evidence with fresh eyes, ignore the administrator’s opinion, and decide for herself who was right.
How Dorian Law Won “De Novo” Review:
We didn’t just accept the plan’s language at face value. We dug into the procedural details.
We argued that while the Chevron Plan allowed for delegation of discretion, it required that delegation to be made in a specific “written instrument”. Chevron never produced that document. They tried to claim the employee-facing Summary Plan Description (SPD) was the instrument, but we successfully argued that an SPD does not meet the Plan’s own legal requirements for such a delegation.
The Court agreed with us.
In a game-changing order, the Court ruled that Chevron had failed to prove it ever properly delegated discretion to ReedGroup. Therefore, the deferential standard was off the table, and our client would get the fair, fresh de novo review he deserved.
Our Second Battle: Proving TBI is a Physical, Neurological Injury
Once we secured a level playing field, we attacked the merits of the denial.
Chevron’s Argument: Chevron’s case rested on cherry-picked evidence. They pointed to a neuropsychological exam that used the dismissive phrase “generally intact”. They relied on their own file-reviewing doctor, Dr. Farache (whom we noted was not a TBI specialist), who claimed the disability was purely psychological.
Dorian Law’s Counter-Argument: We presented the Court with a mountain of scientific medical evidence proving Mr. Cobb’s TBI was a physical, structural, and permanent brain injury.
Objective Imaging: We showed that MRI scans revealed “multiple punctate chronic microhemorrhagic residua”—the signature of Diffuse Axonal Injury (DAI), which is a permanent, physical tearing of the brain’s connective wiring. We also presented a PET scan showing “diminished frontal lobe metabolism,” objective proof that the front of Mr. Cobb’s brain was not functioning correctly.
Objective Testing: We provided specialized vestibular (VNG/vHIT) test results that showed “central pathology”. This proved his severe, debilitating dizziness wasn’t “in his head”—it was caused by physical damage to his brainstem.
Expert Medical Opinions: We showed that Mr. Cobb’s entire treating team supported him. His treating neurologist, Dr. Neff, diagnosed him as disabled from the “sequelae of traumatic brain injury”. Most powerfully, his own treating psychiatrist, Dr. Tran, wrote a letter explicitly stating that the “main cause of his disability... is not psychological”.
Exposing the “Any Occupation” Flaw: Finally, we proved ReedGroup never even bothered to do the work required by the Plan. To deny benefits after 24 months, the administrator had to prove Mr. Cobb could perform any gainful occupation. We showed the Court that ReedGroup had never performed a vocational analysis, never identified a single job he could do, and never calculated if that job would meet the Plan’s 70% wage requirement.
The Final Judgment: A Win for Mr. Cobb
Faced with the objective medical evidence and the clear procedural failures we identified, the Court entered judgment in favor of Mr. Cobb and remanded the case to the administrator for further proceedings.
This victory is a testament to our firm’s deep expertise in ERISA law. We know that these cases are won by fighting on two fronts: the procedural (like the standard of review) and the medical (like proving the true nature of a TBI).
Insurers and administrators will continue to use “mental illness” limitations to deny claims for complex neurological conditions like TBI, Post-Concussive Syndrome, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and Long COVID. This result proves that with the right legal team, those tactics can be defeated.
Your Questions Answered: TBI and Long-Term Disability Denials (FAQ Section)
Q1: Can my disability insurer deny my Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) claim because I have a history of depression or anxiety?
A: No. A prior or co-existing mental health condition does not give an insurer the right to deny a legitimate disability claim based on a new and distinct physical injury like a TBI. In the case of Cobb v. Chevron, we successfully proved that our client’s disability was caused by his neurological injury, not his prior history of depression.
Q2: What is the most important evidence to prove a TBI disability claim?
A: Objective medical evidence is crucial. This includes advanced imaging like MRI and PET scans that show structural or functional brain damage, as well as neuropsychological testing that documents cognitive deficits in memory and processing speed. In Mr. Cobb’s case, we also used specialized vestibular testing (VNG/vHIT) to objectively prove the brain-based cause of his dizziness.
Q3: Is a “paper review” by the insurance company’s doctor enough to terminate my benefits?
A: Yes, but they shouldn’t be, especially when they contradict the findings of your treating specialists, objective, and subjective evidence without a sound and medically substantiated basis. We often see insurers rely on cursory reviews from non-treating specialists to deny claims. We successfully argued that the comprehensive, in-person evaluations by Mr. Cobb’s team of treating doctors were far more credible than the insurer’s one-hour review by a carpal tunnel expert.
Q4: What does “any occupation” mean in an ERISA disability plan?
A: Be cautious of general answers like: after an initial period (often 24 months), most ERISA plans require you to prove you are unable to perform the duties of “any occupation” for which you are reasonably qualified. This is a stricter standard than being unable to do your “own occupation.” Why be cautious? Because the definitions can, and frequently do, have material differences from policy to policy. For example, a key part of our work for Mr. Cobb was showing how his specific limitations—like cognitive deficits and severe dizziness—prevent him from performing any job that can provide him with a certain amount of income and was not an occupation Chevron offered and was not caused by a psychopathological condition found in the DSM V.
Q5: How can an ERISA lawyer help if my long-term disability claim was denied?
A: An experienced ERISA lawyer can manage the entire appeal process, gather the necessary medical and vocational evidence, challenge the insurer’s flawed reasoning, and, if necessary, file a federal lawsuit to recover your benefits. As we did in the Cobb case, a skilled lawyer can also identify critical procedural errors by the administrator that can change the outcome of the entire case.
About the Author & Dorian Law’s Commitment to Justice
Brent Dorian Brehm, is the Founding Partner of Dorian Law. Admitted to practice in California and before several federal courts, Mr. Brehm has dedicated his career to representing individuals in complex ERISA and private disability insurance disputes. He has a passion for fighting for those who have been wrongfully denied the benefits they are owed and has a track record of success against some of the nation’s largest insurance companies and corporations. (A full profile for Brent Dorian Brehm is available on the Dorian Law website).
The story of Daniel Cobb is a story of resilience and justice. If you are facing a similar battle with a disability insurer, you do not have to fight alone. Contact Dorian Law today for a confidential consultation to understand your rights. We are here to help.