The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has ruled that the uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage in a golf cart insurance policy did not cover the policyholder for injuries he suffered in an auto accident.
The Case
In 2012, Mark Pippin purchased a Yamaha golf cart and an insurance policy from Progressive Northern Insurance Company for the golf cart, which included up to $500,000 of uninsured/underinsured motorist ("UM") coverage. The golf cart policy excluded UM coverage for injuries sustained while using any "motor vehicle . . . owned by or available for [Mr. Pippin's] regular use."
In 2014, Mr. Pippin was involved in an accident while he was driving a 2013 Infiniti QX56. The Infiniti was owned by Pippin Investments, LLC, and leased to Pippin Brothers, Inc., Mr. Pippin's business. The Infiniti was insured under a business auto policy. Mr. Pippin drove the Infiniti every day as his primary vehicle for both business and personal use. Mr. Pippin sustained injuries in the collision that exceeded the limits of the other driver's liability insurance. The business policy on the Infiniti did not include UM coverage.
After the accident, Mr. Pippin submitted a claim to Progressive for UM coverage under the golf cart policy for the accident involving the Infiniti.
Thereafter, Progressive asked a court to declare that the medical payments and UM coverage provisions in the golf cart policy excluded coverage for the 2014 auto accident. It also sought a declaration that Oklahoma law did not compel it to provide UM coverage for the accident or that Oklahoma law compelled coverage only to the extent of statutory minimum limits.
Mr. Pippin counterclaimed, seeking reformation of the policy and a declaration that the policy's UM coverage applied.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma granted summary judgment to Progressive. The district court concluded that the golf cart policy did not provide coverage for the 2014 accident because the medical payments provision only covered injuries sustained while operating the golf cart and the UM coverage excluded injuries sustained while occupying a motor vehicle available for the insured's regular use.
The district court also held that because a golf cart was not a "motor vehicle," Oklahoma law did not prevent the exclusion from being written into the policy.
Mr. Pippin appealed to the Tenth Circuit.
Oklahoma Law
Oklahoma law provides:
A. No policy insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any person arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle shall be issued, delivered, renewed, or extended in this state with respect to a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state unless the policy includes the coverage described in subsection B of this section.
B. The policy referred to in subsection A of this section shall provide coverage therein or supplemental thereto for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are legally entitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles and hit-and-run motor vehicles because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death resulting therefrom. Coverage shall be not less than the amounts or limits prescribed for bodily injury or death for a policy meeting the requirements of Section 7-204 of Title 47 of the Oklahoma Statutes, as the same may be hereafter amended; provided, however, that increased limits of liability shall be offered and purchased if desired, not to exceed the limits provided in the policy of bodily injury liability of the insured.
Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3636.
Oklahoma law defines "motor vehicle," for purposes of Section 3636, as:
a self-propelled land motor vehicle designed for use principally upon public roads or streets but does not mean or include . . . , if not subject to motor vehicle registration, any equipment which is designed for use principally off public roads and streets.
Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3635.
The Tenth Circuit's Decision
The circuit court affirmed.
In its decision, the circuit court ruled that a golf cart was not a motor vehicle and that no Oklahoma law required UM coverage outside the context of "motor vehicles."
Therefore, the Tenth Circuit decided, Progressive was free to write the golf cart policy as it saw fit.
The circuit court rejected Mr. Pippin's contention that because Progressive called the policy "uninsured motorist coverage," the policy had to comply with the requirements of Okla. Stat. tit. 36, § 3636. Section 3636, the Tenth Circuit concluded, defined the type of UM coverage insurers had to provide when, and only when, the coverage applied to a "motor vehicle."


