Opinion
No. CV99 059 26 18
November 13, 2003
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION FOR COLLATERAL SOURCE REDUCTION
On May 21, 2003, the jury returned a verdict in the above-captioned case. The jury found economic damages in the amount of $4,098.15, non-economic damages in the amount of $4,000.00, and total damages were in the amount of $8,098.15. The verdict was accepted by the court on May 21, 2003. On May 22, 2003, the defendants filed a motion to reduce the verdict on account of collateral sources citing Practice Book § 16-36 and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-225a.
The plaintiff carried automobile insurance under a policy issued in the state of Massachusetts. That policy had a mandatory provision referred to as PIP which appears to be roughly the equivalent of a Connecticut medical pay provision. The plaintiff's own insurer, pursuant to its obligations under the PIP coverage, paid $4,098.15 in medical bills. The defendant claims that that money paid in satisfaction of medical bills qualifies as a collateral source under Section 52-225a, et seq. The defendant further claims that the payor Massachusetts insurance company is not entitled to be indemnified for those payments because of the provisions in Section 52-225c which provides "unless otherwise provided by law, no insurer or any other person providing collateral source benefits as defined in Section 52-225b shall be entitled to recover the amount of any such benefits from the defendant . . ."
However, Section 52-225a(a) provides:
. . . There shall be no reduction for (1) a collateral source for which the right of subrogation exists.
Both the language of the Massachusetts policy and the General Statutes of Massachusetts provide "any insurer paying benefits in accordance with the provisions of this section shall be subrogated to that extent to the right of any party it pays . . ." General law of Massachusetts, Chapter 90, Section 34M.
Because the court can find no authority, and the defendant cites none, which would indicate that a court in either Connecticut or Massachusetts would refuse to honor the contractual language and statutory requirement entitling the Massachusetts insurer to subrogation, the court concludes that the medical payments made under the Massachusetts policy by the Commerce Insurance Company are not a collateral source. The court holds that those payments are subject to a right of subrogation.
The court concludes that the defendant is entitled to no reduction for collateral source payments.
In view of the court's holding the medical payments made are not a collateral source, the plaintiff's second argument in opposition to collateral source reduction is moot. The plaintiff argues that his insurance premium costs were $2,669.00. The PIP coverage is required under Massachusetts law. While the automobile policies for the two years in question totaled $2,669.00, cost of the PIP coverage is itemized on the bill and totaled approximately $80.00. In Jones v. Riley, 263 Conn. 93 (2003), our Supreme Court held that a plaintiff was not entitled to an offset for the entire premium paid for a policy issued in Connecticut. The court concluded that the plaintiff was only entitled to an offset for the premium actually attributable to the medical payment coverage. That rationale of that holding appeared to be that "plaintiff was not required to purchase medical coverage from Allstate . . . the plaintiff had the option. Although she was required to purchase the automobile policy in order to secure medpay coverage, the converse is not true: she was not required to purchase medpay coverage in order to secure the automobile policy." Jones at 106. It appears that under Massachusetts law a party is required to purchase medpay coverage [PIP] in order to secure the automobile policy. This is true even though the cost of the PIP coverage is broken out on an itemized bill. It is not clear whether or not this would change the result in Jones. Since the court has concluded that the medical payments which were made is not a collateral source, the court need not decide whether a premium credit would be the total policy cost of $2,669.00 or the PIP cost of $80.00.
KEVIN E. BOOTH, JUDGE.