American Employers' Insurance v. Commissioner of Insurance

142 N.E.2d 341, 335 Mass. 748, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 573
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMay 3, 1957
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 142 N.E.2d 341 (American Employers' Insurance v. Commissioner of Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
American Employers' Insurance v. Commissioner of Insurance, 142 N.E.2d 341, 335 Mass. 748, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 573 (Mass. 1957).

Opinion

Honan, J.

This is a petition by all but one of the casualty insurance companies which intend to write compulsory motor vehicle insurance in this Commonwealth during 1957 praying that the compulsory motor vehicle rates established by the commissioner of insurance for the year 1957 be annulled on the ground that such rates do not comply with the standard set by the statute. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 175, § 113B. Besides, eight of the petitioners alleged that the rates established are confiscatory.

The respondent on September 26, 1956, filed in his office a schedule of tentative rates for the year 1957. These rates were the same as the 1956 rates adjusted only to compensate for the elimination of the premium surcharges resulting from the repeal of that portion of the highway safety act, G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 90A, which provided for the collection of additional premiums based on the assessment of demerit points against certain owners of motor vehicles. The collectible level of the tentative rates remained the same as they were for 1956. See Opinion of the Justices, 334 Mass. 711, 713.

The case was reported and reserved, without decision, by *750 the single justice on the pleadings, the exhibits introduced before the commissioner, his order of November 21, 1956, fixing the classifications and rates, and a transcript of the oral testimony introduced before him at a public hearing, “such decree to be entered as equity and justice may require.”

Eighty-two per cent of the vehicles included in the compulsory insurance group are private passenger vehicles, and it is against the rates upon this class that the attack of the petitioners is mainly directed. In setting rates for 1957 under the statute the commissioner first estimated the pure premium or loss level per automobile which would be incurred during 1957. He then allowed 32.5% of the total premiums for expenses of underwriting, thus leaving 67.5% of the total premiums or charges for the “pure premiums” or losses per automobile to be incurred in 1957. There is really no complaint against this method of computation, but the complaint is that the estimated pure premium or loss level per automobile for 1957 is so low that there will be no such percentage for expenses.

Rate making is not essentially a judicial function. American Employers’ Ins. Co. v. Commissioner of Insurance, 298 Mass. 161, 169. New England Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Department of Public Utilities, 327 Mass. 81, 85. Opinion of the Justices, 328 Mass. 679, 681. Where the duty is imposed upon a public official by statute to establish a rate that is “adequate, just, [[and] reasonable,” G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 175, § 113B, it is our duty to see that a rate of that description is promulgated by him. We may reexamine all findings of fact to determine whether they have reasonable support in the evidence. American Employers’ Ins. Co. v. Commissioner of Insurance, 298 Mass. 161. Insurance Co. of North America v. Commissioner of Insurance, 327 Mass. 745, 753. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co. v. Commissioner of Insurance, 329 Mass. 265, 273. Where the claim is that the rate established constitutes confiscation or some other infringement of rights guaranteed under the State or Federal Constitution, then the complainant is entitled to our own inde *751 pendent judgment as to law and facts. Lowell Gas Co. v. Department of Public Utilities, 324 Mass. 80, 86-87, and cases cited. Boston Consolidated Gas Co. v. Department of Public Utilities, 327 Mass. 103, 104-105.

The commissioner is authorized by the statute, G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 175, § 113B, to call for such data, statistics, schedules or information of the companies as he may deem necessary to enable him “to fix and . . . maintain fair and reasonable classifications of risks and adequate, just, reasonable and non-discriminatory premium charges . . ..” The petitioners for many years have maintained a voluntary association known as the Massachusetts Automobile Rating and Accident Prevention Bureau, hereinafter called the bureau, for the purpose of supplying him with such data and information. At the public hearing on October 25, 1956, the companies presented schedules, statistics, data and information which had become available since the 1955 hearing. Copies of all of these documents had been forwarded to the commissioner from time to time pursuant to his orders for the reporting of such data and information.

At the opening of the public hearing on October 25, 1956, the commissioner stated that he intended to make no basic change in the compulsory rates for 1957 over the rates for 1956 other than to make the adjustment resulting from the repeal of the demerit surcharge provisions of the highway safety act (G. L¡ ¡[Ter. Ed.] c. 90A). He said that he had a number of choices for fixing the- rate for 1957; that as to each choice he had applied his judgment based upon his knowledge, experience and available facts in determining the amount- that would be required by the companies to pay the losses to be incurred in 1957; that the “loss experience reported in the full year 1955 would indicate a rate level close to that which produced rates for 1956, which consisted of the experience of the single' year 1954, modified by accident frequency trends indicated in that year and the first few months of 1955”; that there was available to him the latest experience showing the sharp increase in claim costs during the full year 1955 and the first few months of 1956; *752 that “we are well into a period of abnormalcy first felt in 1954, and which will continue to be felt for a number of years”; and that the rate- years of 1954, 1955 and 1956 show the rapid changes under which accident frequency decreased under the highway safety act and increased following its repeal. 1

The commissioner also stated -that an important factor bearing on rates in these abnormal times is the reorganization of the courts, aimed to break up congestion which was mainly due to tort cases arising out of automobile accidents; that he had not entirely ignored the increased accident frequency or the earíy and possible effects of the reorganization of the courts; that “The advantages of an earlier, and, therefore, less costly disposition of claims in a rising economy can be plainly seen, and the effect of this should financially benefit the purchaser of compulsory insurance in the years to come”; that the- problem of a rate maker-during this period of abnormal times is to determine whether a rise in accident claim figures indicates an actual rise in accident frequency or a distortion of loss figures; and that the tentative rates might be revised in accordance with the facts submitted at the hearing.

After the commissioner had concluded his statement, the 'petitioners called an actuary of the division of insurance as a witness to ascertain what part he had in preparing the 'tentative rates as in previous years, and when it appeared 'he had no part, counsel for the petitioners called the com- ' missioner as a witness.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Merisme v. Board of Appeals on Motor Vehicle Liability Policies & Bonds
539 N.E.2d 1052 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1989)
New England Medical Center, Inc. v. Rate Setting Commission
384 Mass. 46 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1981)
Attorney General v. Commissioner of Insurance
353 N.E.2d 745 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1976)
Insurance Rating Board v. Commissioner of Insurance
268 N.E.2d 144 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1971)
G & M Employment Service, Inc. v. Commonwealth
265 N.E.2d 476 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Commissioner of Insurance
263 N.E.2d 698 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Massachusetts General Hospital v. Commissioner of Administration
231 N.E.2d 543 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1967)
Wannacomet Water Co. v. Department of Public Utilities
194 N.E.2d 109 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
142 N.E.2d 341, 335 Mass. 748, 1957 Mass. LEXIS 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-employers-insurance-v-commissioner-of-insurance-mass-1957.