Midwest Mutual Insurance Company v. St. Anthony Hospital, 00CA1667 (October 25, 2001): In a declaratory judgment/interpleader action, defendant St. Anthony Hospital (Hospital) appealed the judgment denying its request that plaintiff insurer (Midwest) pay interest on payments due under an insurance policy. In previous litigation, the court of appeals held that Midwest was required to pay Hospital the full policy limit of $100,000. On remand, Hospital filed a motion seeking interest, pursuant to C.R.S. § 10-4-708(1.8), on the personal injury protection (PIP) benefits paid by Midwest. That statute authorizes recovery of such interest if an insurer fails to make prompt payment of PIP benefits as required under § 10-4-708(1). Midwest declined to pay interest, and the trial court entered summary judgment for Midwest.
On appeal, Hospital contended that the trial court erred in concluding that it was not entitled to interest under § 10-4-708(1.8). The court of appeals reversed, holding that an insurer will be liable under the statute for interest on overdue benefits even if it withheld the benefits in good faith. The court also noted that Midwest's filing of the declaratory judgment action and deposit of funds into the court registry protected Midwest from an award of treble benefits based on willful and wanton conduct, but did not insulate it from the interest provisions of the statute. The judgment was reversed and the case remanded for calculation of interest owed to Hospital.

Under W.C.R.P. IV(N)(1), a final admission of liability must "specify and describe" respondents' position on medical benefits after maximum medical improvement (MMI). The decision in Grover v. Industrial Commission states that a claimant may be entitled to a general award of post-MMI medical benefits, but respondents have the right to contest liability for any specific treatment that is not reasonably necessary to relieve the claimant from the effects of the industrial injury.
The language used to address liability for future medical benefits may lead to unnecessary litigation unless drafted carefully. Under the Grover decision, respondents should not limit their admission of liability to specific treatment (i.e., "5 physical therapy sessions"). Rather, if liability for future medical benefits is admitted, general benefits should be awarded.
Where liability for future medical benefits is admitted, the following language should be used: "Respondents admit liability for post-MMI medical treatment provided by the authorized treating physicians that is reasonable, necessary and related to the compensable injury."
If the final admission denies liability for future medical benefits, then the following language should be used: "Respondents deny liability for post-MMI medical treatment on the grounds that it is not reasonable, necessary or related to the compensable injury."