National Grange Mutual Ins. v. Thibodeau, No. Cv95-248987s (Nov. 1, 1995)
Opinion
Both defendants were defaulted for failure to appear. At the hearing in damages plaintiff submitted three separate claims for damages:
Property damage resulting from the loss to the insured car based on collision coverage. $ 3,498.70
Reimbursement of Basic Reparations payments to the insured operator. 5,000.00
Reimbursement of an uninsured payment to the insured operator. 23,500.00
The court accepted plaintiff's subrogation claim for damage CT Page 12670 to the insured vehicle.
The court rejected the plaintiff's claim for reimbursement of the sums paid to its insured operator under uninsured motorist coverage.
Berlinski v. Ovellette,
Ciulewicz v. Doyle,
Although the statute permitting subrogation for basic reparation benefits has been amended rescinding such rights as of January 1, 1994, the policy providing such benefits was written prior to the expiration of the no fault law and the accident triggering the basic reparation loss occurred while the no fault law was in effect. This fact pattern permits an insurer to file a subrogated claim for reimbursement.
Accordingly judgment may enter for the plaintiff in the amount of $8,498.70 plus costs.
Dorsey, J. State Trial Referee
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
1995 Conn. Super. Ct. 12669 (National Grange Mutual Ins. v. Thibodeau, No. Cv95-248987s (Nov. 1, 1995)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.