Denver · ERISA Claims Guide
Most ERISA pages tell Colorado claimants the same discouraging thing: the court will defer to the insurer unless its decision was arbitrary and capricious. For a policy issued in Colorado that may well be wrong. Section 10-3-1116(3) of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires policies issued here to give a claimant who has exhausted the appeal a de novo review, and the federal court in Denver has repeatedly held that provision survives ERISA preemption. We compared three ERISA claims attorneys in Denver on bar records, whose side each firm actually acts for, published fee terms and verified reviews, then set out who each one suits and where each one falls short.
DJA Editorial · Legal Directory Research
Checked against state bar licensee records, court sources and public review platforms ·
The short answer
Three practices, and only one of them represents denied claimants from an office in Colorado. Read the fit line before you read anything else, because two of these three are the right call only in particular circumstances.
1
McDermott Law, LLC
Best for a Colorado claimant who needs the appeal built locally
2
Jones & Keller, P.C.
Best if you are the employer or the plan fiduciary, not the claimant
3
Jonathan M. Feigenbaum, Esquire
Best for a national or precedent-setting ERISA question
At a glance: ERISA Claims Attorneys in Denver, compared
| Firm |
Best for |
Focus |
Bar record |
Fees |
Rating |
| McDermott Law, LLC |
Best for a Colorado claimant who needs the appeal built locally |
Claimant-side disability, life, AD&D and long-term care denials |
Shawn E. McDermott, Colorado, number unpublished |
Free review of denied claims, rate not published |
not verified |
| Jones & Keller, P.C. |
Best if you are the employer or the plan fiduciary, not the claimant |
Plan sponsors, fiduciaries and institutional ERISA advice |
Multiple attorneys, none named on the ERISA page |
Not published, hourly business firm |
not verified |
| Jonathan M. Feigenbaum, Esquire |
Best for a national or precedent-setting ERISA question |
Claimant-side ERISA, appeals, litigation and fee applications |
Massachusetts. Colorado admission not established |
Free initial consultation, rate not published |
not verified |
ERISA Claims in Denver: the local picture
180 days
The deadline that ends most claims
A denial letter on a disability claim must give you at least 180 days to file the administrative appeal, and 60 days on life and health claims. Miss it and the courts treat the claim as unexhausted. The record also closes when that appeal is decided, so a judge will usually never see anything you did not file in time.
De novo
The Colorado rule nobody puts on the page
Section 10-3-1116(3) of the Colorado Revised Statutes requires a health, life or disability policy issued in this state to give a claimant who has exhausted administrative remedies a de novo review in court and a trial by jury. Judges in the District of Colorado have held the de novo part is saved from preemption as a law regulating insurance. The Tenth Circuit has not yet ruled on it.
$0
Three things that cost nothing
Your entire claim file, including the insurer’s internal notes and the reports of doctors it paid, must be handed over free on written request within 30 days. A Department of Labor benefits advisor will review an employer plan denial at no charge on 1-866-444-3272. The Colorado Division of Insurance takes complaints about policies issued here. None of the three stops the 180 day clock.
What clients in Denver say: Only one of these three has a Colorado client record to read, and it is a deep one. The reviews on the featured firm run to dozens and they describe the same arc again and again: a long-term disability payment stopped, an insurer named, a multi-year relationship, benefits reinstated. Reviewers name individual lawyers and staff rather than the firm. Several say plainly that other firms had turned the case down first. The other two practices have no Colorado claimant feedback at all, for very different reasons. Ask any firm you call how many Colorado ERISA appeals it filed last year, and whether it has ever argued section 10-3-1116 in the District of Colorado.
How we chose these Erisa Claims Attorneys in Denver
We looked at practices handling ERISA benefit claims for Denver residents, then compared them on things you can check yourself: whose side the firm actually acts for, the bar record for each named attorney, the ERISA stages the practice covers, whether fee terms are published, where the office really is, and the visible client reviews.
The three are a shortlist, not a ranking, and they are not interchangeable. Firm details come from each firm’s own site and attorney pages, cross checked against public attorney directories and state bar records, plus the federal claims regulation, the Colorado Revised Statutes and reported District of Colorado decisions for the deadline, review standard and free help figures. Bar numbers and admissions we could not confirm against an official register during this update are flagged on the page rather than filled in, and no recovery figure appears unless the firm publishes it itself.
1. McDermott Law, LLC
Best for a Colorado claimant who needs the appeal built locally
The only claimant-side ERISA practice on this page with a Colorado office. Shawn McDermott has been writing about this law in Colorado since a 2004 piece in The Colorado Lawyer, and the firm now runs six named people out of the Denver Tech Center across disability, life, long-term care and accidental death denials. It also keeps a Colorado PERA page, which matters because PERA is a governmental plan and sits outside ERISA entirely. As an ERISA claims attorney in Denver for the appeal that decides everything, this is the local bench.
Identity and footprint
Office4600 S Ulster St, Suite 800, Denver, CO 80237, in the Denver Tech Center
Phone(303) 964-1800, consistent across the site, directory listings and the contact page
TeamShawn E. McDermott, Emily Fourcroy, Lisa Kantor, Benjamin Dowling, Madelyn Mercier and Mary Susan L. Kern
Named by clientsReviewers name Shawn, Mary Sue and Lisa individually, which is a sign of who actually runs files
ReachThe firm describes serving Denver and the wider Rocky Mountain region rather than nationally
Consultation offerA free Review of Denied Claims, stated on the page as limited to denied claims rather than open-ended advice
Technical faultSeveral links in the page body point at the WP Engine staging domain rather than the live site, which leaks a development URL into production.
Page freshnessLast modified 11 September 2026
Practice and scope
Core workDenied insurance claims: ERISA and individual disability, life insurance denials, long-term care, accidental death and dismemberment, bad faith, and Colorado PERA disability
The PERA distinctionColorado PERA is a governmental plan, which ERISA expressly does not cover, so a PERA disability denial runs on a different track altogether. Keeping a standalone page for it is a genuine local signal.
Also personal injuryA full injury practice sits on the same site, covering car, truck, motorcycle, slip and fall and wrongful death. Ask what share of the caseload is benefits work.
What the page gets rightThe 180 day and 60 day appeal windows, the 45 day decision period with one 45 day extension, that the administrative record closes, that there is no jury and no punitive or pain and suffering recovery, and that the Tenth Circuit treats abuse of discretion and arbitrary and capricious as interchangeable
What the page leaves outNo mention of C.R.S. 10-3-1116(3) or the District of Colorado decisions holding that a Colorado-issued policy entitles the claimant to de novo review. The page tells readers to expect a highly deferential standard instead.
Stale statisticsThe disability statistics block cites the National Safety Council for 2001 and the Health Insurance Association of America via a February 2000 newspaper report. Both are around 25 years old.
DepthSeparate pages on ERISA terminology, appealing claim decisions, litigation guidelines and safe harbour rules, plus a blog running to ERISA-specific posts
Credentials and licensing
Shawn E. McDermottLicensed in Colorado and practising in Denver
Published in the fieldAuthor of an article on ERISA in The Colorado Lawyer, published May 2004, which is the state bar journal rather than a marketing outlet
Lisa KantorListed on the firm’s team page. A California attorney of that name, State Bar number 110678 and status Active, is a nationally known claimant-side ERISA litigator whose bar record still shows her long-standing California firm.
Mary Susan L. KernNamed in multiple client reviews as running files directly
Team sizeSix named people, which is larger than a solo practice and small enough that you will know who has your file
Directory listingsHolds a Distinguished Justice Advocates listing, plus Leaders of Law and Local Counsel listings, all badged on this page
Language to noteThe page describes the team as specialising in ERISA litigation. Colorado restricts claims of specialisation, so treat that as marketing rather than a certification.
Fees and consultation
ConsultationFree Review of Denied Claims, by form or phone. Note the scope: it is a review of a denial rather than general advice.
ERISA fee shiftingThe page correctly notes that a court may award your attorney fees. Under 29 U.S.C. 1132(g)(1) that is discretionary, and the Supreme Court held in Hardt v. Reliance Standard that some degree of success on the merits is enough to qualify.
Free before you payAsk the firm to request your claim file at the consultation. It costs nothing and what is in it usually decides whether the case is worth taking.
What clients say
✓ Deepest Colorado client record here
✓ Insurers named, including UNUM
✓ Relationships running years, one for a decade
✓ Taken on after other firms declined
· Reviews are firm-selected from Google and Avvo
The firm publishes more than twenty client accounts, drawn from Google and Avvo and labelled as such. The pattern is consistent: a long-term disability payment stopped, a named insurer, benefits reinstated, and a relationship measured in years rather than months. One reviewer describes a decade with the firm. Several say other firms turned the case down first. Individual lawyers are named, particularly Shawn McDermott and Mary Sue Kern, alongside Lisa. Treat the set as the firm’s own selection and ask for references, but note that no other practice on this page has any Colorado client record at all.
Why they fit Denver: The obvious first call if you are in Colorado and your employer plan has denied you, because the appeal is the whole case and it needs to be built by someone who will be in the District of Colorado if it goes further. Six people, a genuinely deep ERISA library, a PERA page nobody else keeps, and a client record that runs to years rather than transactions. Go in knowing the trade offs. No fee basis appears anywhere, the page never mentions section 10-3-1116 even though it is the strongest argument a Colorado claimant has, the disability statistics are a quarter of a century old, and staging URLs are leaking into the live page. Ask what the firm charges at each stage, and ask directly whether it will argue for de novo review under Colorado law.
2. Jones & Keller, P.C.
Best if you are the employer or the plan fiduciary, not the claimant
Read this one carefully before you call. Jones & Keller is one of Denver’s established full-service business firms, formed in 1991 from two older Denver partnerships and now covering more than sixteen practice areas from 1675 Broadway. Its ERISA practice is real and substantial, but it is institutional: the firm’s own description says it advises plan fiduciaries, plan sponsors and clients including banks and insurance companies on fiduciary duties, prohibited transactions and plan design. If you are on that side of the table, these are the ERISA plan and benefits lawyers in Denver for you.
Identity and footprint
Office1675 Broadway, 28th Floor, Denver, CO 80202, in the downtown core
Address historyDirectory records still carry 1999 Broadway Suite 3150, 1675 Broadway 26th Floor and 1625 Broadway. Confirm the floor before you visit.
Phone(303) 573-1600, with fax (303) 573-8133
FoundedJanuary 1991, by the merger of Jones, Meiklejohn, Kehl & Lyons and Keller, Wing & Godbolt. The firm states its predecessors go back more than 70 years.
ScaleA full-service firm across more than sixteen practice areas, serving clients from startups to Fortune 500 companies
RecognitionThe firm cites Best Lawyers, Chambers and Partners, AV Preeminent and Super Lawyers recognitions across its attorneys. Inclusion in a list is not a rating of skill.
PositioningThe firm describes itself as offering large firm experience with the continuity of a boutique, and names reasonable fees as part of its stated mission
Practice and scope
Which side the ERISA practice acts forThe firm’s own ERISA page says it advises institutions acting as fiduciaries of ERISA plans, plan sponsors, securities issuers, and institutional and individual fiduciaries, with clients including banks, insurance companies, investment advisers, construction companies, placement agencies and brokerage firms
What that work involvesProhibited transactions and exemptions, plan asset issues, fiduciary duties, securities disclosure, the ERISA and executive compensation consequences of mergers, acquisitions and spin-offs, and the design of tax-qualified benefit plans
What it does not describeNothing on the ERISA page describes representing a denied claimant in an administrative appeal or a section 502(a)(1)(B) benefits suit. That is a different practice from the one advertised here.
Why the distinction mattersIf your denial came from an insurance company, a firm whose stated ERISA clients include insurance companies may face a conflict. Ask about it on the first call rather than after.
Wider practiceCorporate law, mergers and acquisitions, litigation, private equity, real estate, securities, tax, labour and employment, banking, environmental law, and private wealth and estates
Litigation capabilityThe firm states its litigators appear in state and federal courts across the United States, which includes the District of Colorado where ERISA suits are heard
Money page noteThe link on this page goes to the firm homepage rather than the ERISA practice page, because the homepage is what was supplied
Credentials and licensing
Bar recordNo ERISA attorney is named on the practice page, so there is no individual Colorado registration number to check here.
Firm ageThirty five years under the current name, with predecessor firms founded more than seventy years ago by Marion Jones and Alec Keller
Recent hiresThe firm has announced associates joining in complex commercial litigation and securities, which indicates where it is currently growing
BenchAttorneys practising across more than sixteen areas, serving clients locally, nationally and internationally
One credential to ask forIf you are a plan sponsor, ask whether the attorney has handled a Department of Labor plan investigation, because that is the test of institutional ERISA work rather than plan drafting
Fees and consultation
ConsultationBy enquiry through the site or the main number. No free consultation is advertised.
No fee shifting on this sideThe ERISA fee award under 29 U.S.C. 1132(g)(1) runs to either party at the court’s discretion, but an employer or fiduciary paying for compliance advice is simply paying for it
A question worth asking firstIf you are a denied claimant reading this, ask whether the firm takes claimant-side benefits work at all before you discuss your case
What clients say
· No consumer review base found
· Recognition is peer and directory based
· Client base is institutional
· Nothing visible on benefits claims
No meaningful consumer review record surfaced for this firm, which is normal and expected for a business law practice whose clients are banks, insurers and corporate plan sponsors rather than individuals. Those clients do not post reviews. What stands in its place is peer recognition through Best Lawyers, Chambers and Partners, AV Preeminent and Super Lawyers, which the firm cites across its attorneys. None of it speaks to how a denied claimant would be treated, because that is not the work.
Synthesized from publicly visible snippets: Firm site
Why they fit Denver: The right firm when you are on the other side of an ERISA problem: a plan sponsor facing a fiduciary question, a bank or adviser worried about prohibited transactions, a company working out the benefits consequences of an acquisition. Thirty five years in downtown Denver with a full corporate and litigation bench behind the benefits practice is genuinely useful for that. The honest caveat is that this is not a claimant firm. Its own ERISA page lists insurance companies among its clients, no attorney is named on that page, there is no consumer review record, no fee terms appear, and the link here lands on the homepage rather than the benefits practice. If your disability claim has just been denied, ask first whether the firm acts for people in your position at all.
3. Jonathan M. Feigenbaum, Esquire
Best for a national or precedent-setting ERISA question
A national authority, working from Boston. Jonathan Feigenbaum has spent his career on claimant-side ERISA and has the speaking record to show for it: the American Bar Association Labor and Employment Section employee benefits committee, the ABA insurance and employee benefits midwinter symposium on section 502(a)(3) claims across the circuits, the American Association for Justice on the Department of Labor claims regulations, and the Western Trial Lawyers Association twice. If your matter turns on an unsettled point rather than the facts, a national ERISA benefits attorney of that profile is worth a call, with Colorado counsel alongside.
Identity and footprint
Office184 High St, Suite 503, Boston, MA 02110. There is no Colorado office.
DistanceBoston is roughly 1,750 miles from Denver. Every meeting would be remote.
Two live numbersThe contact page gives 617.357.9700. A second contact page on the same site, and several directory profiles, give 617-934-7488.
Solo practiceThe site names one attorney throughout. There is no team page.
Experience claimThe site says more than 25 years in one place and more than 30 years in another. Both are the firm’s own figures and they do not agree.
Free consultationOffered and stated plainly on the site
Money page noteThe link here goes to the site homepage, which is written for a Boston and Massachusetts audience
Practice and scope
Core workDenied insurance claims under ERISA: long-term and short-term disability, life insurance, long-term care, health care, and benefits including 401(k), pension and severance
Also non-ERISAIndividual disability policies bought on the private market, and Massachusetts bad faith claims, which are a state remedy unavailable on an ERISA plan
An unusual lineActs for doctors and healthcare providers chasing payment an insurer refuses as experimental or not medically necessary, and advises personal injury and consumer lawyers facing health plan subrogation and reimbursement claims
Reported decisionsThe attorney profile cites litigated matters including Rogers v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Where the depth showsSpeaking topics include securing statutory attorney fees, admitting electronic evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 902(13) and 902(14), and ERISA section 502(a)(3) claims across the circuits. These are practitioner-level subjects rather than consumer content.
The Colorado problemThe site is written around Massachusetts law and Boston courts. Nothing on it addresses C.R.S. 10-3-1116, the District of Colorado or Tenth Circuit authority.
Language to noteThe site describes him as a nationally respected authority in ERISA and insurance law. Colorado restricts how lawyers may claim a field as their own, so treat that phrasing as his marketing.
Credentials and licensing
AdmissionPractises from Boston and holds Massachusetts admission
Why that matters hereAn ERISA benefits suit from Colorado is filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, with any appeal to the Tenth Circuit, which sits in Denver. An out-of-state attorney generally needs admission pro hac vice and local counsel.
American Bar AssociationSpoke to the Section of Labor and Employment Law employee benefits committee on trends in ERISA disability claim litigation in February and June 2021, and to the annual Tort Trial and Insurance Practice midwinter symposium in January 2018 on section 502(a)(3) claims across the circuits
Other speakingAmerican Association for Justice annual convention, July 2017, on the new Secretary of Labor claims regulations; Massachusetts Employment Lawyers Association, June 2020; Western Trial Lawyers Association in February 2019 and March 2020
The Rocky Mountain linkThe Western Trial Lawyers Association appearances are the closest thing here to a regional connection, and both concerned practical litigation subjects rather than Massachusetts law
Fees and consultation
ConsultationFree initial consultation, stated on the site
Two sets of feesIf local counsel is required in Colorado, ask whether that is an additional cost to you or comes out of the same fee
Statutory feesHe has spoken publicly on securing statutory attorney fees, which under 29 U.S.C. 1132(g)(1) can shift your costs onto the plan. Ask how he approaches that application.
What clients say
· No Colorado client record
· Recognition is professional rather than consumer
✓ Published decisions available to read
✓ Peer speaking record is substantial
There is no Colorado client feedback to read, which is unsurprising for a Boston solo practice. What can be checked instead is more useful than most review sets: reported decisions in his own name, and a run of invitations to speak to the American Bar Association, the American Association for Justice and the Western Trial Lawyers Association on ERISA litigation subjects. That is peer assessment rather than client assessment. If you are considering him from Denver, ask for two client references in states where he appeared as visiting counsel.
Why they fit Denver: Worth a call when your matter turns on law rather than facts: a circuit split, a section 502(a)(3) equitable claim, a fee application worth arguing hard, an evidentiary problem nobody local has met before. The speaking record at the ABA and the AAJ is real peer recognition and the published decisions are there to read. The caveats are entirely about geography. There is no Colorado office and no stated Colorado admission, so a Denver case would need pro hac vice and local counsel, meaning two lawyers on one file. Nothing on the site addresses Colorado’s de novo statute or Tenth Circuit authority, two different phone numbers are live, and the years-in-practice figure differs between pages. Ask what the combined arrangement would cost before anything else.
What to check before hiring an Erisa Claims Attorney in Denver
✓ Find the denial letter and count 180 days
Disability claims get at least 180 days to appeal, life and health claims 60. That window is the case. Write the deadline somewhere you will see it, keep the envelope for the postmark, and treat the last month as unusable, because no lawyer can assemble medical evidence in three weeks. Missing it usually means no court will hear the claim at all.
✓ Ask for your entire claim file in writing today
The plan must produce it free, within 30 days of a written request: internal claim notes, the reports of physicians the insurer paid to review you, surveillance summaries, vocational assessments. You do not need a lawyer to ask and you should not wait for one. Send it by certified mail. What is in that file usually decides whether the case is worth taking.
✓ Check where your policy was issued
If the policy was issued in Colorado, section 10-3-1116(3) of the Colorado Revised Statutes says you are entitled to de novo review after exhausting your appeal, and judges in the District of Colorado have upheld that against preemption arguments. The Tenth Circuit has not settled it, so the point has to be argued. Ask any lawyer you call whether they have run it.
✓ Work out whether ERISA applies at all
Government and church plans are outside ERISA, which is why a Colorado PERA disability denial follows completely different rules. A policy you bought yourself on the private market is a state contract claim with a jury and bad faith remedies available. Employer plans are ERISA: federal court, no jury, no pain and suffering. The answer changes the case from day one.
✓ Do not file a holding appeal to buy time
A short letter saying you appeal is legally an appeal. The insurer can then decide it within 45 days on the file as it stands, and the record closes. Everything you meant to add afterwards never gets read by anyone, including the judge. If you need longer, ask in writing for an extension rather than starting the clock.
✓ Look the attorney up yourself
The Colorado Supreme Court Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel runs a free attorney search showing registration number, status and public discipline. Search the individual who would sign your complaint. None of the three practices on this page publishes a Colorado registration number on its own site, and one of them is not based in Colorado at all.
Erisa Claims Attorneys in Denver: frequently asked questions
How long do I have to appeal an ERISA denial in Colorado?
At least 180 days from the adverse benefit determination on a disability claim, and 60 days on a life or health claim. Federal regulation sets that floor and almost every plan writes the exact figure into the policy. Courts have consistently held they cannot hear a benefits suit where the internal appeal was never properly filed, because the claim is unexhausted. The insurer then has 45 days to decide the appeal, extendable once by another 45 days with notice to you.
Will a Denver judge defer to the insurance company?
That is the standard assumption and it may be wrong here. Under Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch the default is de novo review, and deference applies only where the plan grants the administrator discretion. Colorado went further: section 10-3-1116(3) requires policies issued in this state to give a claimant who has exhausted remedies a de novo review and a jury trial. Judges in the District of Colorado, in Kohut, McClenahan and Shafer, have treated the de novo part as a law regulating insurance that survives preemption. The Tenth Circuit has not yet ruled, so expect the insurer to fight it.
Can I get a jury, or sue for bad faith?
On an employer plan, normally no. ERISA preempts state bad faith law and the circuits have uniformly held there is no jury right, so your recovery is generally the benefits owed plus possible interest and attorney fees. Colorado’s statute purports to give a jury trial as well as de novo review, but that half of the provision sits much closer to a direct conflict with ERISA’s enforcement scheme and is the weaker argument. A policy you bought yourself, outside work, keeps the Colorado remedies intact.
What does an ERISA attorney charge?
It varies by stage and none of the three practices on this page publishes a rate. Appeal work and litigation are often priced differently, so ask about both. On top of whatever you agree, a court can order the plan to pay your attorney fees under 29 U.S.C. 1132(g)(1). The Supreme Court held in Hardt v. Reliance Standard that you need only some degree of success on the merits rather than a final judgment to be eligible, which is a lower bar than most claimants realise.
My benefits come through PERA. Is that ERISA?
No. The Colorado Public Employees’ Retirement Association is a governmental plan, and ERISA expressly excludes plans established or maintained by governmental entities, as it does church plans. That means a PERA disability denial runs on its own rules and timetable rather than the federal ones described here. The same exclusion catches many teachers, state employees and municipal workers. Confirm which system your benefit actually comes from before you rely on any ERISA deadline.
Where would my case actually be heard?
An ERISA benefits suit from Colorado is filed in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, in Denver. If you file in state court the insurer will remove it to federal court. Appeals go to the Tenth Circuit, which also sits in Denver. This is why an out-of-state attorney, however distinguished, generally needs admission pro hac vice and Colorado local counsel, and why it is worth asking who would actually stand up at the hearing.
DJA Editorial
Legal Directory Research
Compiles Distinguished Justice Advocates city guides from state bar and attorney regulation records, federal regulation, state statute and reported decisions, and publicly visible client reviews. Firms appear as a shortlist rather than a ranking. Figures a firm publishes about itself are labelled as such, and anything that could not be verified is flagged on the page rather than estimated.
Sources and method
- Firm websites, practice pages and attorney profiles: office addresses, phone numbers, named attorneys, whose side each practice acts for, practice scope, speaking records and consultation policy.
- State bar and attorney regulation records, including the State Bar of California licensee search, plus public attorney directories for admissions and practice history, with anything unconfirmed flagged on the page.
- Client reviews published on Google and Avvo and republished by the featured firm, labelled as the firm’s own selection where that is the case.
- 29 CFR 2560.503-1: the 180 day and 60 day appeal windows, the 45 day decision period, the free claim file within 30 days, and the exhaustion requirement.
- 29 U.S.C. 1132(a) and 1132(g)(1), with Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch and Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.: the cause of action, the default standard of review and discretionary attorney fee awards.
- C.R.S. 10-3-1116(3), with Kohut, McClenahan and Shafer v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado: the Colorado de novo review provision and its treatment under ERISA preemption.
- ERISA governmental and church plan exclusions, as they apply to Colorado PERA and other public sector benefits.
- US Department of Labor Employee Benefits Security Administration and the Colorado Division of Insurance: the free benefits advisor line and the state insurance complaint route.
