Opinion ID: 1293583
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 23

Heading: other holdings of court of appeals

Text: To assist in understanding the result of our review of the Court of Appeals' holdings, we here note the remaining portions of the Court of Appeals' decision not argued by the parties on this appeal: (1) The Bureau in its filing proposed that future premium rates vary within a range of plus or minus 5% according to the territory or geographical area of the State in which an insured is located. The Commissioner found that the projections of territorial rate differences did not take into consideration the new statutory classification plan and did not reflect reasonably anticipated territorial loss experience. He concluded that this made the proposed rate changes excessive and unfairly discriminatory. He also entered other findings and conclusions with respect to territorial rate differences. The Court of Appeals held that the evidence did not support the Commissioner's findings and conclusions and these portions of his order were set aside. (2) The Commissioner's order included findings concerning collision insurance deductibles and a conclusion that the rate proposed for $25.00 deductible collision insurance was excessive in relation to the coverage provided. Again, the Court of Appeals found no evidence in the record to support the conclusion and those portions of the Commissioner's order were set aside. (3) In his order disapproving the filing, the Commissioner further ordered that the Bureau be allowed 60 days within which to file an amended filing consistent with his findings and conclusions. The Court of Appeals held that, since the Bureau excepted to and appealed from the Commissioner's order, the appeal removed the matter from the Commissioner to that court and that part of the Commissioner's order therefore became a nullity. With respect to these three holdings, we do not disturb the Court of Appeals' decision. None of the parties have raised these points on appeal to this Court.