Kracht v. Aalfs Associates H.C.P.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that receiving advice or treatment during the exclusionary period for a condition “which proves to be the same condition the claimant seeks benefits for” qualifies as. a preexisting condition regardless of whether there was an accurate diagnosis
• “If the language of the policy does not require a diagnosis in order for the subsequent treatment of the illness to be excluded under the preexisting condition, the absence of a diagnosis is irrelevant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).