Gibson v. Connecticut General Life Ins. Co. of Hartford, 55409

• Decision Date: 28 April 1978
• Docket Number: No. 55409,No. 1,55409,1
• Citation: 245 S.E.2d 49,145 Ga.App. 799
• Parties: T. C. GIBSON v. CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 49

245 S.E.2d 49

145 Ga.App. 799

T. C. GIBSON v. CONNECTICUT GENERAL LIFE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT.

No. 55409.

Court of Appeals of Georgia,Division No. 1.

April 28, 1978.

Richard R. Kirby, Atlanta, for appellant.

Tommy Holland, Carter, Ansley, Smith & McLendon, Atlanta, for appellee.

SHULMAN, Judge.

Appellant was injured on the job while an employer-purchased group disability insurance policy issued by appellee-Connecticut General Life Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut (hereinafter "Connecticut General") was in effect. Connecticut General made disability benefit payments to appellant for a time, but, after learning that appellant's Veterans' Administration disability compensation benefits had been increased following appellant's injury, reduced those payments. Appellant brought suit to recover the amount by which the insurance policy benefits were decreased. We granted appellant's petition for interlocutory review to consider the trial court's interpretation of the group disability insurance policy issued by Connecticut General to appellant's employer.

The sole issue for our consideration is whether Connecticut General is entitled, pursuant to the insurance policy, to offset any portion of Veterans' Administration disability compensation benefits against policy disability benefits.

The contested policy clause provides as follows: "The amount of Monthly Income otherwise payable for any monthly period will be reduced by the amount of all Other Income Benefits (as defined) payable for the same monthly period so that the sum of Monthly Income payable and all Other Income Benefits does not exceed 662/3% of the Associate's Basic Monthly Earnings."

Other income benefits as defined in the policy include any periodic cash payments provided by "any plan, fund, or other arrangement providing benefits for loss of time from employment because of disability pursuant to any compulsory benefit act or law of any government."

Connecticut General asserts that it is entitled to offset from policy disability insurance benefits that portion of the Veterans' Administration benefits which Connecticut General maintains is attributable to loss of time from employment and, therefore, according to Connecticut General, constitutes other income benefits. Connecticut General argues that since appellant's combined anatomical disability rating remained unchanged after the injury, the increased Veterans' Administration benefits paid after the injury for recuperation following surgery were paid only because of appellant's inability to work, i. e., loss of time from employment. We reject this line of reasoning and hold that Connecticut General is not authorized by the above contract provisions to offset Veterans' Administration benefits.

1. The scheme of the Veterans' Benefits Act (38 U.S.C.A. § 301, et seq.) militates against the conclusion that such benefits are for loss of time from employment.

The record does not indicate the Code section authorizing disability compensation. Appellant herein is receiving Veterans' Administration disability compensation under either 38 U.S.C.A. § 310 or § 331. The sections are substantially similar and provide in pertinent part as follows: "Basic entitlement . . . For disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty . . . in the active military, naval, or air service . . . the United States will pay to any veteran thus disabled and who was discharged or released under conditions other than dishonorable from the period of service in which said injury or disease was incurred, or preexisting injury or disease was aggravated, compensation as provided in this subchapter . . ."

Compensation is defined in 38 U.S.C.A. § 101(13) as "a monthly payment...