A federal district court in Florida has ruled that a motorcycle was a vehicle under the terms of three automobile insurance policies and, therefore, that the motorcycle’s owner was not entitled to uninsured or underinsured (“UM”) benefits under the policies for injuries he suffered in an accident.
|The Case
When Kristen Cusack’s son, Christopher Straub, moved in with Kristen and Robert Cusack, he owned an uninsured Harley Davidson motorcycle.
He subsequently was involved in an accident while driving his motorcycle.
Straub sued State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, which had issued automobile insurance policies to the Cusacks, to recover UM benefits.
State Farm moved for summary judgment, arguing that the “plain meaning” of the term motor vehicle in its policies included Straub’s motorcycle and, therefore, that he could not recover UM benefits under the policies as a result of an exclusion in the policies.
|The State Farm policies
The automobile policies issued by State Farm to the Cusacks stated:
Exclusions
THERE IS NO COVERAGE:
2. FOR AN INSURED WHO SUSTAINS BODILY INJURY:
a. WHILE OCCUPYING A VEHICLE OWNED BY YOU OR ANY RESIDENT RELATIVE IF IT IS NOT YOUR CAR OR A NEWLY ACQUIRED CAR;
(bold italics, in original policies, indicate terms defined by the policies).
|The district court’s decision
The district court granted State Farm’s motion.
In its decision, it agreed with State Farm that the term “vehicle” in the UM benefit exclusion had to be given its plain meaning, and that the “plain meaning of the term ‘vehicle’ certainly encompasse[d] a motorcycle.”
The district court reasoned that its conclusion also was “impliedly supported” by the Cusack policies because they defined a “motor vehicle” as a “vehicle with four or more wheels....”
According to the district court, that definition implied that “there could be ‘vehicles’ with fewer than four wheels that [were] simply undefined.” The district court stated that it would not rewrite the UM benefits exclusion to add the word “motor” before “vehicle” and that it would not deem “vehicle” ambiguous because it was undefined and construe it against State Farm.
The case is Straub v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co., No: 5:16-cv-342-Oc-30PRL (M.D. Fla. Jan. 18, 2017).
Steven A. Meyerowitz, Esq., is the director of FC&S Legal, the editor-in-chief of the Insurance Coverage Law Report, and the founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc. He can be reached at [email protected].
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Steven A. Meyerowitz
Steven A. Meyerowitz, a Harvard Law School graduate, is the founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc., a law firm marketing communications consulting company. He may be contacted at [email protected].
