(Credit: LIGHTFIELD STUDIOS/Adobe Stock)
The Kentucky Court of Appeals granted summary judgment to an insurer, denying a passenger’s request for underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage due to an exclusion in the insured driver’s policy. The case is Peterson v. Grange Prop. & Cas., 568 S.W.3d 884 (Ky. Ct. App. 2018).
|What happened
On February 13, 2016, Alicia L. Peterson, the plaintiff, was a passenger in Laura Zirnheld’s vehicle when it was involved in a collision with Mary Haeberlin’s vehicle. Peterson suffered severe injuries and sought recovery from Haeberlin in Jefferson Circuit Court.
She settled the claim with Haeberlin, then filed an amended complaint seeking underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage against Zirnheld’s auto insurer, Grange Property & Casualty. Zirnheld’s auto policy under Grange had a $100,000 limit for UIM coverage.
|Who is an insured?
To qualify for UIM coverage, you must be an insured. The Grange policy defined “insured” for the purposes of UIM coverage as “the named insured, any family member, and any other person while occupying the covered auto who is entitled to do so if that person is not insured for UIM coverage under another policy.”
Recommended For You
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
© 2025 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.
