Summary
In Safeco Ins. Co. v. Santagata, 29 Conn. Sup. 300 (1971), the court noted that a claimant's compliance with policy language nearly identical to the policy language in the present case that requires a claimant to "[s]ubmit to examination at our expense, by physicians of our choice, as often as we reasonably require" is a condition precedent to arbitration.
Summary of this case from Northern Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. CovillionOpinion
File No. 128504
Since compensation for pain and suffering can be recovered for a reasonable time in the future even though no permanency is claimed, the termination of medical treatment by an injured person would not excuse him from submitting to a physical examination in compliance with his uninsured motorist insurance policy.
Memorandum filed October 8, 1971
Memorandum on motion for stay of arbitration proceedings. Motion granted.
Paul J. Falsey, of New Haven, for the plaintiff.
Garber Apicella, of New Haven, for the defendants Marguerite and John Santagata, Jr.
No appearance for the defendants Anthony Apicella and Roger Frechette.
The plaintiff is requesting a stay of arbitration proceedings under an uninsured motorist provision in an insurance policy, since the defendants Santagata have failed to comply with a request for a physical examination. The policy provides: "The injured person shall submit to physical examination by physicians selected by Safeco when and as often as Safeco may reasonably require." This is one of the conditions precedent to arbitration. Frager v. Pennsylvania General Ins. Co., 155 Conn. 270, 277. The exhibits fail to disclose any waiver of the condition on the part of the plaintiff. The most that can be said for the defendants Santagata is that there was a misunderstanding concerning the effect of a termination of medical treatment. Compensation for pain and suffering can be recovered for a reasonable time in the future even though no permanency is claimed. Schultz v. Pivar, 370 Pa. 271, 279. The plaintiff is making a reasonable request, especially when the defendants Santagata do not intend to terminate their claim for pain and suffering contemporaneously with medical treatment. The stay is granted, subject, however, to restoration on compliance.