TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Baker v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

Elliot Baker v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company

Baker v. Hartford Accident & Indem. Co., 194 N.E.2d 635 (Mass. 1963)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 29, 1963
Citations
194 N.E.2d 635346 Mass. 774

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Exceptions overruled. In this action of contract the plaintiff, as an insured member, sought reimbursement for a percentage of medical expenses under a policy of group insurance covering accidental bodily injury or sickness issued by the defendant to the plaintiff’s employer. The judge found for the defendant. The case turns on the question of compliance by the plaintiff with the requirement as to the filing of notice of claim. The policy provided that “ [w] ritten notice of claim must be given to the company within twenty days after the occurrence or commencement of any loss covered by this policy, or as soon thereafter as is reasonably possible.” It provided further that failure to furnish the required notice shall not invalidate or reduce any claim if it be shown not to have been reasonably possible to furnish the notice and that notice was furnished as soon as was reasonably possible. Vacations excepted, from September 19,1958, to September 25, 1959, the date of the writ, at a total cost of about $1,600, the plaintiff was psychoanalyzed twelve times a month by a qualified psychiatrist for a condition diagnosed as anxiety neurosis. The judge found that the loss to the plaintiff “occurred” in September, 1958, that the defendant received written notice of the claim on March 23, 1959, and concluded that there was a failure to comply with the notice of claim requirement. There was no error. Although, as used in the policy, the word “commencement” rather than “occurrence” more aptly refers to loss from sickness, as distinguished from accidental bodily injury, the result is the same. The notice was not seasonably filed. Failure to comply with a requirement of notice of claim in an insurance contract, where, as here, there was no showing of excuse or waiver, prevents recovery against the insurer. Wilcox v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. 304 Mass. 441 , and cases cited. Segal v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. 337 Mass. 185, 188-189 , and cases cited. See Walterman v. Mutual Benefit Health & Acc. Assn. 260 App. Div. (N. Y.) 478. American Ins. Co. v. Brown, 203 Okla. 407 .

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1967: 11972: 119672026peak 1967 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Viani v. Aetna Insurance Company501 P.2d 706 (Idaho 1972)
  2. Duggan v. Travelers Indemnity Co.265 F. Supp. 819 (D. Mass. 1967)

Most recent

  1. Viani v. Aetna Insurance Company501 P.2d 706 (Idaho 1972)
  2. Duggan v. Travelers Indemnity Co.265 F. Supp. 819 (D. Mass. 1967)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Segal v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 148 N.E.2d 659 (Mass. 1958) 33
Am. Ins. Co. of Tex. v. Brown, 1950 OK 223, 222 P.2d 757 13
Wilcox v. Metro. Life Ins., 23 N.E.2d 1002 (Mass. 1939) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list