There are some cases in which a logical resolution of an issue is logically crafted, but does not seem right. Palisades Insurance Company v. Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield, approved for publication on July 27, 2021, presents such a case, a resolution that is logical but just doesn’t seem right.

It all started with an automobile accident or, rather, four automobile accidents with injuries to occupants requiring medical treatment. Each of the injured persons had elected under their automobile policies to designate their health insurer as the primary insurer responsible to pay for medical care in the event of auto injury. This option became available in 1990 when the No-Fault Act was amended to allow insureds to choose their health insurer as primarily responsible for paying medical expenses arising out of automobile accidents, an option which reduced the insured’s auto policy premiums. Health insurers, in turn, were prohibited from including in their policies any provision which “restricts, limits, or excludes coverage” for expenses arising out of automobile accidents.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]