Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Appeals Court Considers When an Insured Is 'Totally Disabled' and Which State Law Applies
Summary
Panel heard conflicting views on whether a doctor who reduced hospital work but maintained an office practice is 'totally disabled' under his policy and whether New York or Massachusetts law governs Chapter 93A claims; parties disputed proof‑of‑loss timing and monthly indemnity provisions.
May it please the court. Rita Gontumis, arguing for appellant Dr. Richard Constantino, told the Appeals Court that the trial court improperly resolved a factual dispute on summary judgment by treating the insured’s occupation (hospitalist versus broader physician practice) and his proof‑of‑loss as legal questions for the judge rather than factual issues for a jury.
Gontumis said the policy requires an inquiry into the insured’s "important duties"…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
