American Family Insurance Group, Petitioner, Appellant v. Harold L. Schroedl, Respondent

Summary

The court held that the insurer, not the insured, must determine whether an insured aged 65 or older can reasonably be expected to receive wage-loss reimbursement benefits under the No-Fault Act. Because the insurer must make that determination at every policy renewal, the insured's prior selection to exclude work-loss coverage could not eliminate the statutory inquiry or justify denial of benefits. The court affirmed the judgment requiring coverage, without deciding whether the rental-property maintenance expenses independently constituted wage loss.