The car accident attorneys of Law Offices of Andrew Alitowski, P.A. report on changes to Kentucky injury law on a regular basis. In March of 2011, the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky decided a Kentucky car accident case. (See Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Varble, et al., 2011 WL 1103120 (W.D. Ky.)). In this case, the car insurance company filed a motion for summary judgment asking the court to determine that neither of the Defendants could recover on the UIM provision in their Auto-Owners policy because the vehicle in which the car accident occurred, was excluded from UIM coverage under the terms of the policy. In the end the court granted the motion and the reasoning is as follows.
From 2005-2008, Roy and Phyllis Varble, Nellie Carraway (Phyllis’s sister), and Randy Sands (Phyllis’s son) lived together in a house in Owensboro, Kentucky. The family moved around finally settling in Mexico. In January of 2009, the family was moving from Utah to Mexico with all of their belongings. The family was in two different cars when the car Phyllis was driving flipped over killing Phyllis and causing Roy to suffer serious bodily injury as a result of the car accident.
The Chevrolet Uplander was insured by Auto-Owners. It had $100,000 of UIM. The car that flipped had $25,000 of insurance and paid that right away. Roy made a claim for the UIM which in turn led to the Plaintiff bringing a declaratory action to determine whether or not it had to pay the UIM coverage.
The Court in this matter looked at the policy and the entire fight over the car accident UIM proceeds came down to the “regular use” exclusion. The policy held that the it would pay compensatory damages legally entitled to recover from the owner or operator of any underinsured automobile because of bodily injury. The terms of the policy specifically exclude automobiles “owned or leased by, furnished to or available for regular use of Roy or anyone living with Roy from the definition of “underinsured automobile.”” Further, the policy stated that the relevant provision indicates that any vehicle owned by anyone living with Roy does not qualify as an “undersigned automobile” under the policy. The Court held that therefore, the terms of Roy’s auto insurance policy excluded any UIM coverage for the injuries he suffered in that Kentucky serious car accident, so long as the “regular use” exclusion applied.
If you have been the subject of Kentucky car accident case, please call and speak to a Kentucky car accident lawyers at the Law Offices of Law Offices of Andrew Alitowski, P.A. at 888-ASK-ANDREW (275-2637). We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
If you are injured…Ask Andrew!!!