The defendant insurer moved for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for Income Replacement Benefits as statute-barred.
The plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received benefits until she returned to work.
The insurer sent a valid refusal letter terminating benefits.
The plaintiff later stopped working and sought reinstatement of benefits, arguing a new limitation period began upon the second refusal.
The court applied binding precedent holding that a return to work does not create a rolling limitation period.
The action was dismissed as it was commenced beyond the two-year limitation period triggered by the initial valid refusal.
