at an insurance office, a question arises whether Title III of the ADA has any application. See Leonard F., 967 F.Supp. at 806 (suggesting that "Title III of the ADA is not applicable to employee benefits,” and that "the plain meaning and legislative history of the ADA make[ ] clear that claims of discrimination in employee benefits are covered by Title I, not Title III”). While we have recently held in Pallozzi v. Allstate Life Ins. Co., 198 F.3d 28 (2d Cir.1999), that an insurance office in its dealings with the public is a “place of public accommodation” and is regulated by Title III, it does not necessarily follow that Title Ill is implicated when an insurance company issues a disability policy to an employer for the benefit of its employees. See, e.g., Ford 145 F.3d at 612-13 (<HOLDING>); Parker 121 F.3d at 1011 (same). (Were the
holding that trial court was not required to conclude that wife was disabled for alimony purposes where she testified about her disability and offered documentation of her social security disability benefits but where she produced no medical testimony and where other evidence indicated that she was otherwise active and did not stay in bed all day as she claimed holding that because plaintiff received her disability benefits via her employment and had no nexus to defendants insurance office  she was not discriminated against in connection with a public accommodation and therefore could not state a claim under title iii holding that threatening employee to mind her own business investigating her videotaping her without her permission and forcing her to take polygraph could not be considered adverse employment actions because they had no effect on conditions of employment holding that an employee who claims to have been terminated by her employer for having exercised her right to disability benefits raised a cognizable claim under  510 of erisa notwithstanding the fact that she received the benefits from her employer prior to termination holding that insurance company administering employerprovided disability plan was not place of public accommodation under ada because employees received their benefits through employment not through a public accommodation