Reinsurance Law Blog

Reinsurance Law Blog

Category Archives: Vehicle

Subscribe to Vehicle RSS Feed

UM coverage on vehicle involved in the accident is primary — Arkansas App.

Posted in Contractual Liability, Vehicle
In Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co. v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co., 2016 Ark. App. 563, Roberson was injured while driving a car insured by Shelter.  Roberson had UM coverage through Southern Farm Bureau (Farm Bureau).  Shelter paid Roberson’s claim and argued that either Farm Bureau was liable for the damages under its “other insurance”… Continue Reading

Owned vehicle exclusion, underinsured motorist coverage, 8th Circuit, Missouri law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Vehicle
Walker v. Progressive Direct Ins. Co. Steve Walker died in a motorcycle accident. After his widow settled against the tortfeasor for policy limits of $25,000, she sought underinsured motorist coverage UIM under two Progressive Auto Policies insuring the Walkers’ six other cars. The trial court granted Progressive’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the policies’… Continue Reading

Per person liability limit applies regardless of the number of claims — 10th Cir — Kansas — auto

Posted in New Case, Vehicle
In Hernandez v. Electric Insurance, Yudi, a minor, was injured in a car accident and had over $350,000 in medical expenses. The liability limits on the car was $100,000 per person.  The Hernandezs’ claimed they should get $200,000 —  $100,000 for Yudi’s injuries and $100,000 for dad’s injuries, since Dad had to pay the medical… Continue Reading

Governmental Tort Claims Act, Uninsured Motorist Coverage and Set Off — Okla law

Posted in Contractual Liability, immunity, New Case, Vehicle
In Mariani v. State ex rel. Oklahoma State University, 2015 OK 1, the issue was whether the governmental tortfeasor was entitled to a set off for the uninsured motorist coverage paid by the injured party’s insurer. Under the Governmental Tort Claims Act (GTCA), the state’s liability is limited to a certain dollar amount– in this… Continue Reading

No stacking of automobile liability coverage, Missouri law.

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case, Vehicle
Hiles had two cars, insured under different policies.  Hiles was at fault in an accident that hurt Dutton. Dutton claimed his damages exceeded the minimum limits required by Missouri’s financial responsibility law (MVFRL), which were the limits on Hiles’ policy.  Dutton claimed the MVFRL required payment under the policy of Hiles’ other car, which was… Continue Reading

Choice of Law in Auto Policy, 10th Circuit — Minnesota, Colorado law

Posted in Contractual Liability, Insurance Bad Faith, New Case, Vehicle
In Kipling v. State Farm Mutual Automobile, the plaintiff and her husband were injured in a car accident in Colorado. Plaintiff’s husband was killed.  Plaintiff was in a car provided by her husband’s employer (Quicksilver) when the accident occurred.  The sole cause of the accident was the negligence of the driver of the vehicle that… Continue Reading

Oklahoma law limited damages for uninsured motorists is unconstitutional

Posted in New Case, Vehicle
As part of tort reform, Oklahoma passed a law that precluded uninsured motorists from recovering damages for pain and suffering and other non-economic damages.  The Oklahoma Supreme Court struck down this law as a special law in Montgomery v. Potter.  The court states: Section 7-116 creates an impermissible special class by restricting damages in civil… Continue Reading

Arkansas uses significant contacts to determine UM choice of law

Posted in New Case, Vehicle
In Hoosier v. Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club, 2014 Ark. 524, the insureds got their policy in California, then moved to Texas.  A new declarations page was issued showing the change of residence to Texas.  The insureds were in an accident in Arkansas.  After settling with the tortfeasors, the insureds sought UM (uninsured motorist) coverage.… Continue Reading

“Other Insurance” clause does not violate mandatory car insurance law

Posted in Contractual Liability, New Case, Vehicle
Oklahoma's Compulsory Insurance Law "does not constrain an insurer from declaring its coverage as excess when there is other insurance which covers its insured's liability with respect to a claim also covered by its policy. The statutory policy of the [compulsory insurance law] is implicated only if the insurer denies liability. It does not control a dispute between insurers as to which provides primary coverage. Such a dispute is a matter of contract. " Where two insurers cover the loss and both policies have mutually repugnant other insurance clauses, they will both be on the hook for their pro rata share.… Continue Reading
Lexblog