Pending · due 2 Apr 2027
Rules 1.1.0 · as of 14 Sep 2026
Owen Scott Muir · Said 2 Apr 2025 · owen-1698
Quote
“Once the extremely predictable lawsuit happens, I can go to discovery, find this article in an inbox, find the proof that it was opened, and then prove that they knew this was a problem well before my lawsuit.”
The author speaks in the voice of a hypothetical class-action ERISA attorney who forwards this article to insurers; he calls a lawsuit over the adolescent TMS coverage requirement extremely predictable.
Intake
- EventA proposition written from a template on the asset, with a resolution criterion and a named public source, before the outcome is looked up. The same event resolves every person's items on it. Method ›
- Lawsuit filed over the Cigna/Evernorth adolescent TMS coverage policy
- AreaOne of five topic classes: regulatory decisions, clinical trial outcomes, company and market outcomes, payer and policy, practice adoption. Every event has one area. Method ›
- Payer and policy
- DeadlineThe date by which the event must happen for the item to be true. It comes only from the person's words through the anchor table. Method ›
- None stated · undated panelItems with no deadline in the person's words, scored on a uniform 24-month window from the statement date. Part of the headline panel since rules 1.1.0; also shown on its own. Method ›, 24-month window to 2 Apr 2027
- Probability
- 0.90 LexiconThe fixed five-bin table that turns a phrase into a probability. The strongest phrase in the claim sentence decides; coders never read tone. Method › · binOne of five lexicon steps: A 'will' 0.90, B 'probably' 0.70, C 'may' 0.50, D 'unlikely' 0.30, E 'never' 0.10. A stated number goes to the nearest bin for calibration only. Method › A · “Once the extremely predictable lawsuit happens”
- Base rateThe probability a published external study gives an event of that class and stage, fixed at intake. Halved when the item window is shorter than the class median time to decision. Never learned from the ledger's own items. Method ›
- None in the table
- Tags
- retrospective
- Coder BCohen's kappa: agreement between two coders beyond chance, from -1 to 1. Reported for admit, event, deadline, bin and asserts from the second-coder match test. Method ›
- admittedA statement that passed intake: sincere, the person's own claim, forward-looking, inside the five areas, and not excluded by a reason code. Only admitted statements become items. Method › · event E-0036 · deadline none · bin A
Registry entry
A lawsuit is filed in a US court against Cigna or Evernorth that challenges, or alleges harm from, the adolescent TMS coverage policy's requirement of prior antidepressant trials.
TRUE on the docket date of the first complaint filed in a US federal or state court (CourtListener or PACER; the state court docket when filed in state court) that names Cigna, Evernorth or a Cigna health plan as a defendant and that challenges, or alleges harm from, the adolescent TMS coverage policy's requirement of prior antidepressant trials (medication failure) for adolescents. A regulatory complaint, a demand letter, an internal appeal or an external review request is not a lawsuit. The plaintiff type (parent, patient, class) and the cause of action (ERISA or state law) are not restricted. FALSE when no such complaint has been filed by the deadline.
Resolution source: Court dockets (CourtListener, PACER; state court dockets)
Readings: 'Such a legal matter', 'the extremely predictable lawsuit', 'parent lawsuits' and the ERISA fiduciary-breach remarks in the same post all read as litigation against Cigna or Evernorth over the adolescent TMS coverage policy; the first such complaint resolves the event.; 'A series of ... parent lawsuits' (owen-1700-a) resolves on the first lawsuit; the count is not scored.
How to read
Coder A
Resolution
- Effective deadlineAn item enters the score only when its deadline has passed and the outcome is true or false. A claim already known true still waits for its deadline. Method ›
- 2 Apr 2027
- Outcome1 if the registry event happened on or before the item's deadline, 0 if it did not. Written by a resolver who never sees p. Method ›
- not occurred · checked through 13 Sep 2026
- Resolver note
- Checked CourtListener RECAP for complaints naming Cigna or Evernorth with 'transcranial magnetic stimulation' filed on or after 2025-01-01: none. A case-name search for Cigna/Evernorth suits mentioning adolescents or minors and depression since 2025 returned five anonymised ERISA dockets (D. Conn., D. Utah, S.D.N.Y., E.D. Cal.) with no TMS reference in their indexed text. The Greenwood v. Cigna/Evernorth class action (filed 2025-08-22) concerns residential mental-health treatment criteria, not TMS. No news report of a complaint over the adolescent TMS antidepressant-trial requirement was found; the only TMS suit against Cigna located is Weil (filed 2015, settled 2017), which predates the policy. Cigna's EN0383 policy still carries the requirement (see E-0037). Not occurred as of 2026-09-13; state-court dockets outside RECAP could not be searched exhaustively.
- Evidence
- CourtListener RECAP docket search: (Cigna OR Evernorth) AND "transcranial magnetic stimulation", filed after 2025-01-01 (0 dockets)
- CourtListener RECAP docket search: case name Cigna/Evernorth AND adolescent/minor/teen AND depression, filed after 2025-01-01 (5 ERISA dockets, none on TMS)
- Greenwood vs. Cigna Health and Life Insurance Company and Evernorth Behavioral Health, Inc.
- BrierThe squared gap between a probability and the outcome, (p - o)^2. 0 is perfect, 0.25 is the constant coin flip, 1 is confidently wrong. Lower is better. Method ›
- Not scored
- RestatementsAll of one person's items on one registry event. A cluster is one observation in every metric, so a claim repeated six times still gets one vote. Method ›
- owen-1696owen-1700
How to read
Registry
Timeline
1 claim against 17 events in the field.
Payer and policy