Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 (2026)

Payments

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Payment under the coverages enumerated in § 23-89-202(1) and (2) shall be made on a monthly basis as benefits accrue.
Benefits for any period are overdue if not paid within thirty (30) days after the insurer received reasonable proof of the amount of all benefits accruing during that period.
If reasonable proof is not supplied as to all benefits accrued, the portion supported by reasonable proof is overdue if not paid within thirty (30) days after the proof is received by the insurer.
Any part or all of the remainder of the benefits that is later supported by reasonable proof is overdue if not paid within thirty (30) days after the proof is received by the insurer.
In the event the insurer fails to pay the benefits when due, the person entitled to the benefits may bring an action in contract to recover them.
In the event the insurer is required by the action to pay the overdue benefits, the insurer shall, in addition to the benefits received, be required to pay the reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the other party, plus twelve percent (12%) penalty, plus interest thereon from the date these sums became overdue.

History. Acts 1973, No. 138, § 8; A.S.A. 1947, § 66-4021.

Research References

ALR.

Comment Note: Amount in Controversy Jurisdictional Requirement under Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). 5 A.L.R. Fed. 3d Art. 2 (2016).

Ark. L. Notes.

Copeland, A Brief Survey of Some Important 1991 and 1992 Insurance Law Decisions, 1992 Ark. L. Notes 85.

Case Notes

Penalty and Attorney's Fees.

Plaintiff held not entitled to attorney's fees or penalty against the insurer. National Investors Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Edwards, 5 Ark. App. 42, 633 S.W.2d 41 (1982).

The trial judge did not err in awarding prejudgment interest on the medical payments claim; however, the trial judge erred in awarding prejudgment interest on the 12 percent penalty and attorney's fees because the penalty and attorney's fees did not become due until they were awarded by the court. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Brown, 48 Ark. App. 136, 892 S.W.2d 519 (1995).

Although the amount that an insured claimed in penalties and attorney's fees under this section could be considered for purposes of determining whether 28 U.S.C.S. § 1332(a) amount in controversy requirements were met, those amounts alone were not sufficient to give a district court jurisdiction over the insured's class action suit against an insurance company. Toller v. Sagamore Ins. Co., 514 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (E.D. Ark. 2007).

Insurer did not meet its burden of proving that the amount in controversy exceeded $75,000 for an insured's individual claim as required by 28 U.S.C.S. § 1332(a) because before including attorney's fees, the maximum amount the insured could seek was $41,754 under § 23-89-202, this section, and § 23-89-209, and to reach $75,000, a court would need to award more than $33,000 in attorney's fees, which seemed unlikely; however, the undisputed facts showed that the value of the insurance at issue, measured by the amount that the insurer would charge for the coverages at issue, exceeded $10,000,000, and thus, the amount in controversy for class claims exceeded $5,000,000, the minimum amount for jurisdiction pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C.S. § 1332(d), and because the insured could not show “to a legal certainty” that the pay-out for the claims of the class would be less than $5,000,000, her motion to remand was denied. Toller v. Sagamore Ins. Co., 558 F. Supp. 2d 924 (E.D. Ark. 2008).

Reasonable Proof.

Sending a hospital bill unaccompanied by any sort of signed application proving that the medical expense entitles the sender to an insurance policy “benefit” is not sufficient to satisfy the “reasonable proof” requirement. Roy v. Farmers & Merchants Ins. Co., 307 Ark. 213, 819 S.W.2d 2 (1991).

Thirty Days.

Where hospital sent a bill to the insurance company in February 1, the company's claim adjuster received an application for benefits from the insured's attorney on February 16, and the insured received benefits on March 14, the benefits were not overdue because they were paid within 30 days after the insurer received proof from the insured. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Brown, 48 Ark. App. 136, 892 S.W.2d 519 (1995).

Workers' Compensation.

Trial court did not err in granting an insurer's motion for summary judgment in an insured's action to recover benefits under a no-fault medical provision because the exclusion contained in the insured's policy was valid and applied in all scenarios where workers' compensation benefits either had been paid in whole or in part or could be paid in whole or in part; because the insured was covered by workers' compensation, she was excluded from receiving medical-payments coverage under § 23-89-205. Bohot v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2012 Ark. 22, 386 S.W.3d 408 (2012).

Cited: Carnathan v. Farm Bureau Ins. Co., 288 Ark. 399, 705 S.W.2d 885 (1986); Woolsey v. Nationwide Ins. Co., 884 F.2d 381 (8th Cir. 1989); United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Norton, 2020 Ark. App. 100, 596 S.W.3d 522 (2020).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Roy v. Farmers & Merchants Ins., 819 S.W.2d 2 (Ark. 1991).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Roy v. Farmers & Merchants Ins., 819 S.W.2d 2 (Ark. 1991). · cites it 5× “In this case we interpret, for the first time, a provision in Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 (1987) requiring “reasonable proof of all benefits” be made to an insurance company.”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Brown, 892 S.W.2d 519 (Ark. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 6× “§ 23-89-208 provides that medical and hospital benefits under an automobile liability insurance policy are overdue if not paid within 30 days after the insurer receives reasonable proof of the amount due, and if the benefits are not paid when due, the person entitled to the…”

United Servs. Automovile Ass'n v. Mary Norton, 2020 Ark. App. 100 (Ark. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 4× “Had USAA paid Norton instead of BHMC as the assignee, it would have been subject to suit by BHMC for failure to honor the assignment.”

Toller v. Sagamore Ins. Co., 558 F. Supp. 2d 924 (E.D. Ark. 2008). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 . Attorneys’ fees and the 12% penalty count toward the jurisdictional minimum for diversity jurisdiction.”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Beavers, 901 S.W.2d 13 (Ark. 1995). “Arkansas Code Annotated § 23-89-208(f) provides for payment of a penalty and attorneys’ fees when the insurer is ordered to pay overdue benefits: In the event the insurer is required to pay the overdue benefits, the insurer shall, in addition to the benefits received, be…”

Bohot v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 386 S.W.3d 408 (Ark. 2012). · cites it 2× “Arkansas Code Annotated section 23-89-208 only requires that such medical payments coverage be paid to those entitled to coverage after receipt of reasonable proof of entitlement.”

Woolsey v. Nationwide Ins., 697 F. Supp. 1053 (W.D. Ark. 1988). “§ 23-79-208, § 23-89-208. A personal representative, of course, succeeds to the contract rights of the decedent and would therefore have a right of action when, as here, the original obligee was deceased.”

Johnson v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2017 Ark. App. 26 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-202 (1). 17 . Ark.”

Ali v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. (W.D. Ark. 2021). · cites it 7× “Motion to Certify Plaintiff argues this case involves an issue of first impression because it requires the Court to interpret Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 to determine if a requirement that an insured submit proof of Medicare eligibility prior to receiving med-pay benefits…”

Hilma Gisela Mejia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2025 Ark. App. 254 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 8× “” 3 Arkansas Code Annotated section 23-89-208(b) states that benefits are overdue if not “paid” within thirty (30) days after the insurer receives “reasonable proof of the amount of all benefits accruing during that period.”

Toller v. Sagamore Ins., 514 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (E.D. Ark. 2007). · cites it 2× “Toller seeks in her complaint the 12% penalty and reasonable attorneys’ fees available pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 . “Statutory attorney fees do count toward the jurisdictional minimum for diversity jurisdiction.”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Esparza, 537 S.W.3d 291 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “VAUGHT, Judge 11 Appellant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) appeals the amount of attorney’s fees that the Benton County Circuit Court awarded to appellee Alvaro Esparza pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 23-89-208(f) (Repl. 2014) after a jury…”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208(b) — 1 case

Hilma Gisela Mejia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2025 Ark. App. 254 (Ark. Ct. App. 2025). “” 3 Arkansas Code Annotated section 23-89-208(b) states that benefits are overdue if not “paid” within thirty (30) days after the insurer receives “reasonable proof of the amount of all benefits accruing during that period.”

— Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208(e) — 1 case

— Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208(f) — 4 cases

Roy v. Farmers & Merchants Ins., 819 S.W.2d 2 (Ark. 1991). “In this case we interpret, for the first time, a provision in Ark. Code Ann. § 23-89-208 (1987) requiring “reasonable proof of all benefits” be made to an insurance company.”

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Esparza, 537 S.W.3d 291 (Ark. Ct. App. 2017). “VAUGHT, Judge 11 Appellant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State Farm) appeals the amount of attorney’s fees that the Benton County Circuit Court awarded to appellee Alvaro Esparza pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 23-89-208(f) (Repl. 2014) after a jury…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.