§431:10C-315  Statute of limitations. (a)  No suit shall be brought on any contract providing motor vehicle insurancebenefits or any contract providing optional additional coverage more than thelater of:

(1)  Two years from the date of the motor vehicleaccident upon which the claim is based;

(2)  Two years after the last payment of motor vehicleinsurance benefits;

(3)  Two years after the entry of a final order inarbitration;

(4)  Two years after the entry of a final judgment in,or dismissal with prejudice of, a tort action arising out of a motor vehicleaccident, where a cause of action for insurer bad faith arises out of the tortaction; or

(5)  Two years after payment of liability coverage,for underinsured motorist claims.

(b)  No suit arising out of a motor vehicleaccident shall be brought in tort more than the later of:

(1)  Two years after the date of the motor vehicleaccident upon which the claim is based;

(2)  Two years after the date of the last payment ofmotor vehicle insurance or optional additional benefits; or

(3)  Two years after the date of the last payment ofworkers' compensation or public assistance benefits arising from the motorvehicle accident. [L 1987, c 347, pt of §2; am L 1997, c 251, §49; am L 1998, c275, §28]

 

Case Notes

 

  Section requires suit for breach of contract to be filedwithin two years after receipt by claimant of last benefit payment.  794 F.Supp. 1012.

  Summary judgment granted in favor of defendant with respectto any claim seeking to recover underinsured motorist benefits under automobileinsurance policy, where any claim regarding underinsured motorist benefits,including the bad faith denial thereof, was barred by the limitations periodset forth in this section (pre-1997 amendment).  11 F. Supp. 2d 1204.

  Controlling date for the purpose of calculating the statuteof limitations for plaintiff's claims of tortious breach of contract and badfaith denial of insurance benefits was two years after the last payment ofmotor vehicle insurance benefits; the date of plaintiff's receipt of payment,within three days of the date on which the payment was mailed, was the date onwhich the statute of limitations began to run.  520 F. Supp. 2d 1212.

  Based on the plain language of subsection (a)(2) (1993),plaintiff's claim for no-fault benefits was not barred, where the last paymentof no-fault or optional additional benefits was made not more than two yearsbefore plaintiff filed complaint against insurer.  109 H. 537, 128 P.3d 850.

  Where the question of whether the underinsured motoristbenefits settlement from non-party insurer would trigger the two-year statuteof limitations under subsection (a) (1993) for plaintiff's claim againstdefendant insurer was an open question of law until this case, there was no badfaith on the part of defendant insurer for having denied plaintiff's claim forno-fault benefits on the basis of the statute of limitations.  109 H. 537, 128P.3d 850.

  Where plaintiff's negligence action was filed more than twoyears after insurance company made its lump sum payment to plaintiff in fullsatisfaction of the release, plaintiff's suit was time-barred.  105 H. 66(App.), 93 P.3d 1173.

  The doctrine of equitable tolling cannot be applied to expandthe two-year statute of limitations period in this section (1993) based solelyon an issuer's failure to provide a formal notice of denial required pursuantto §431:10C-304(3) (1993) in conjunction with a reduced or partial payment. 117 H. 502 (App.), 184 P.3d 817.