Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:3089
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 1 of 12 PagelD #:3089
`
` EXHIBIT 6
`EXHIBIT 6
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 1 of 12 PagelD #:3089
`
` EXHIBIT 6
`EXHIBIT 6
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:3090
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
` FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
` EASTERN DIVISION
`NICOLE BLACKSTONE, DARCY )
`CELESTE, NICHOLAS PERRY, BETTY )
`ROBERGE-HASKELL, and CHERYL )
`SIKORA, Individually and On Behalf )Case No. 1:21-cv-01201
`Of All Others Similarly Situated, )
` )
` Plaintiffs, )
` )
`vs. )
` )
`DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE )
`COMPANY, )
` )
` Defendant. )
`
` ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION
` ANDREA HODENBERG
` JANUARY 18, 2023
` REPORTED REMOTELY
`
` ORAL AND VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF ANDREA HODENBERG,
`produced as a witness at the instance of the Defendant and
`duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered
`cause on the 18th day of January, 2023, from 8:30 a.m. to
`12:23 p.m., before Anne F. Sitka, Certified Shorthand
`Reporter in and for the State of Texas, reported by
`computerized stenotype machine, remotely via Zoom
`videoconference, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
`Procedure and the provisions stated on the record or
`attached hereto.
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:3091
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 2
`
` APPEARANCES
` (All appearing remotely via videoconference.)
`FOR PLAINTIFF:
` Mr. Trang Tran
` TRAN LAW FIRM
` 2537 S. Gessner, Suite 104
` Houston, Texas 77063
` Telephone: 713.223.8855
` E-mail: trang@tranlf.com
`FOR DEFENDANT:
` Mr. Peter J. Stuhldreher
` BAKER & HOSTETLER, LLP
` 811 Main Street, Suite 1100
` Houston, Texas 77002
` Telephone: 713.751.1600
` E-mail: pstuhldreher@bakerlaw.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
` Mr. Trey Solis - Videographer
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:3092
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` PAGE
`APPEARANCES........................................2
` ANDREA JODENBERG
`EXAMINATION
` by Mr. Peter J. Stuhldreher ...................4
` by Mr. Trang Tran ...........................144
`FURTHER EXAMINATION
` by Mr. Peter J. Stuhldreher .................150
`CORRECTION PAGE..................................160
`SIGNATURE PAGE .................................161
`COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE ....................162
`
` EXHIBITS
`EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1 Resume, P000282-284 15
`Exhibit 2 Individual Contributor 110
` Performance Plan,
` DEARBORN641-651
`Exhibit 3 Verification Form, DocuSign 124
`Exhibit 4 Interrogatories 125
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:3093
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 4
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Today is January 18th,
`2023. The time is approximately 8:30 a.m. This is the
`video and oral deposition of Andrea Hodenberg taken in the
`matter of Nicole Blackstone, et al, v Dearborn Life
`Insurance Company. Would counsel please state their
`appearances and locations for the record, after which the
`court reporter will swear in the witness.
` MR. TRAN: Trang Tran for the plaintiff,
`Houston, Texas.
` MR. STUHLDREHER: Peter Stuhldreher for the
`defendant, Houston, Texas.
` ANDREA HODENBERG,
`having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
` BY MR. STUHLDREHER:
` Q. Good morning, Ms. Hodenberg. Will you please
`state your full name for the record?
` A. Andrea Marian Kathleen Hodenberg.
` Q. Thank you. As I said a moment ago, my name is
`Peter Stuhldreher. And you understand that I am one of
`the attorneys representing Dearborn Life Insurance Company
`in this lawsuit? And if I refer to Dearborn today, you
`understand I'm referring to the defendant in this case,
`Dearborn Life Insurance Company? And Ms. Hodenberg, I'm
`having trouble hearing your -- your answers. I see
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:3094
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 72
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Yeah.
` Q. Do you recall what that was?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. Okay. And I think you said -- and forgive me. I
`may have asked this already. I think you said you didn't
`recall if that dollar amount increased when you became a
`senior claims analyst?
` A. Yeah. I don't recall if it did change or not.
` Q. Okay. Fair enough. To the best of your
`recollection, what percentage of the claims that you
`worked on at Dearborn fell within your dollar amount of
`authority?
` A. I would say probably a vast majority.
` Q. Okay. And when that happened, were you able to
`approve those claims without having to get an additional
`level of review or approval from a team leader or manager?
` MR. TRAN: Objection, vague.
` A. The manager -- like I might have the authority to
`approve the dollar amount. But it might not be a claim
`that should be approved. So, I would have to go to the
`manager. Even though the dollar amount might be in my
`authority limit, it might not be a claim that should be
`approved.
` Q (By Mr. Stuhldreher) Fair enough. And so, let's
`talk about it in two -- in two separate stages. So, I
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:3095
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 73
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`think what you're telling me is that any -- any claim
`where your initial review indicated the claim should be
`denies had to be approved by a team leader manager; is
`that fair?
` A. Yeah. Denials, yes.
` Q. Okay. All right. So, let's talk about that for
`a second. Did you ever recall a time when your review of
`the file indicated the claim should be denied and the team
`leader or the manager reviewed and did not agree with that
`denial decision?
` A. Again, not that I recall. But I'm sure that
`there were times that the manager did not agree with my
`denial.
` Q. But none you can recall specifically right now?
` A. Nothing that I can recall specifically, no.
` Q. Okay. Let's put the denials aside for a second.
`And now let's talk about claims where in your initial
`review, it indicated that the claim for benefits should be
`approved for a dollar amount that was within your
`authority. Those claims did not need to be reviewed and
`approved by a team leader manager, did they?
` MR. TRAN: Objection, vague.
` A. Again, so, yeah. No, my manager did not have to
`review them all. But the system would not allow for
`claims to be approved without certain key fields being
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:3096
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 75
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Correct. Correct, yes.
` Q. And sitting here today, do you ever recall any
`instance in which your team leader or manager reviewed an
`approval decision above your dollar authority and
`disagreed with it?
` A. Again, not that I recall. I'm sure it probably
`could have happened, but not to my recollection.
` Q. Okay. When you were at Dearborn, were there
`claims when -- or scratch that. Let me start over.
` At Dearborn, were there times when you had
`claims that would have to be transferred from STD to LTD?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Let's talk about that process. As I
`understand it -- and correct me if I'm wrong on this --
`but you would have to evaluate whether a claim that was
`close to the STD maximum benefit date was appropriate for
`transfer at LTD; is that right?
` A. Again, the facts of the file would determine if
`it should go over to LTD or not. And there were certain
`expectations for case managers for documents to be in the
`claim prior to the transfer to LTD.
` Q. Fair enough. But ultimately, what triggered --
`or that's a bad question. Ultimately, who decided to send
`a file over to LTD?
` MR. TRAN: Objection, vague.
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:3097
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 154
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Okay.
` A. The initial interviews, yes.
` Q. Okay. You mentioned in talking with your lawyer
`that when you had a claim that you worked all the way
`through FINEOS, you completed all the fields and based on
`all of that work, it indicated that the benefits should be
`approved for the amount above your authority, that the
`approval button in FINEOS is obscured? Did I get that
`right?
` A. That is correct.
` Q. Okay. And so, those are the claims that we
`talked about before that a manager or a team leader would
`have to then review and approve the benefit amount that
`had been calculated at the end of that process, right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay. But when the file was given to the team
`leader or the manager to review, you had worked it all the
`way through the process such that there was recommended
`benefit amount that they just had to decide whether they
`were going to approve or not, right?
` MR. TRAN: Objection, vague, assumes facts
`not in evidence.
` A. Yeah. I don't know that I can answer that
`question. The managers had -- you know, if the claim was
`above my authority, I refer the claim over to the manager
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:3098
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 155
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`and they would -- you know, have the authority to make the
`decision on the -- you know, they would be the one to make
`the final decision on the claim.
` Q. (By Mr. Stuhldreher) Yeah. And I didn't --
` A. And I don't --
` Q. Sorry. I didn't hear the last --
` A. That's okay. I would just put my recommendation
`in.
` Q. Fair enough. Okay. That's what I was trying to
`get at. You mentioned in talking to your attorney that
`you believed your salary was based on a 40-hour workweek.
`Did I get that right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you referring to that was how you believe
`your salary was calculated or something else?
` A. I believe that we -- you know, you were hired to
`work five days a week, eight hours a day and your salary
`was based on that schedule.
` Q. Okay. Did anyone tell you that you were being
`hired to only work five days a week, eight-hours a day?
` A. No. But that's standard. How many days a week
`do you work?
` Q. Well, I'm just -- I'm asking you. It sounds like
`the answer is no, no one ever told you that you were only
`being hired at Dearborn to work five days a week,
`
`HANNA & HANNA, INC.
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:3099
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 11 of 12 PagelD #:3099
`
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 162
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`NICOLE BLACKSTONE, DARCY
`CELESTE, NICHOLAS PERRY, BETTY
`ROBERGE-HASKELL, and CHERYL
`SIKORA, Individually and On Behalf
`Of All Others Similarly Situated,
`
`)Case No. 1:21-cv-01201
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`vs.
`
`DEARBORN LIFE INSURANCE
`COMPANY,
`
`Defendant.
`
`party before completion of the deposition.
`
`the deponent:
`X_ was requested by the deponent and/or a party
`before completion of the deposition.
`
`REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
`
`DEPOSITION OF ANDREA HODENBERG
`JANUARY 18, 2023
`
`REPORTED REMOTELY
`
`I, Anne F. Sitka,
`
`the undersigned Certified Shorthand
`
`Reporter in and for the State of Texas, certify that the
`
`facts stated in the foregoing pages are true and correct.
`
`I further certify that pursuant to Federal Rules of
`
`Civil Procedure, Rule 30(e) (1) (A) and (B) as well as Rule
`
`30(e) (2),
`
`that review of the transcript and signature of
`
`was not requested by the deponent and/or a
`
`INC.
`HANNA & HANNA,
`713-840-8484
`
`
`
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:3100
`Case: 1:21-cv-01201 Document #: 81-7 Filed: 06/30/23 Page 12 of 12 PagelD #:3100
`
`ANDREA HODENBERG - 1/18/2023
`
`Page 163
`
`I further certify that I am neither attorney or
`
`counsel for, related to, nor employed by any parties to
`
`the action in which this testimony is taken and, further,
`
`that I am not a relative or employee of any counsel
`
`employed by the parties hereto or financially interested
`
`in the action.
`
`SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO under my hand and seal of
`
`office on this the 3rd day of February, 2023.
`
`o>
`
`f?
`
`f}
`
`
`
`oOaNHDoOFPFWDNYFB
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`C) Ls Gif
`
`oh rit_- —
`
`(a
`
`Anne F. Sitka, CSR, RPR
`Texas CSR 7079
`Expiration:
`04/30/2023
`HANNA & HANNA,
`INC.
`CRF # 10434; Expires 10-31-2024
`8582 Katy Freeway, Suite 105
`Houston, Texas 77024
`713-840-8484 - 713-583-2442
`www.hannareporting.com
`
`INC.
`HANNA & HANNA,
`713-840-8484
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
