No UM Coverage for Shooting Without Contact by Vehicles

0
4Кб

A Gun – Whether in a Car of Not – is not Operation of a Motor Vehicle


Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/being-shot-from-passing-car-viable-um-claim-barry-zalma-esq-cfe and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3950 posts. 


Insurance is important because it protects the insured against many risks of loss like injury from a hit and run by an uninsured motor vehicle. Insurance does not, however, protect against every potential risk of loss.


In Joan Jones McGuire, et al. v. Motorists Mutual Insurance Company, et al., No. 29165, 2021-Ohio-3945, Court of Appeals of Ohio, Second District, Montgomery (November 5, 2021) Joan Jones McGuire and William McGuire appealed from the trial court’s entry of summary judgment against them on their complaint seeking uninsured-motorist benefits from Motorists Mutual Insurance Company. The appellants contended that their Motorists Mutual automobile insurance policy extended uninsured-motorist coverage to Joan McGuire, who was shot by an occupant of an unidentified motor vehicle. The trial court found that no coverage existed.

Factual and Procedural History


The Motorists Mutual policy required the McGuires to establish that the unknown owner or operator’s liability arose out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of a hit-and-run vehicle which hit or which caused bodily injury without hitting the vehicle Joan McGuire was occupying. There was no evidence that the shooter’s vehicle made contact with the McGuire vehicle.


As a matter of law there was no causal connection between the ownership, maintenance or use of the uninsured motor vehicle and there was no causal connection between the use of the uninsured motor vehicle and bodily injuries sustained by appellants as a result of the shooting.


ZALMA OPINION


Since there was no contact between the vehicles nor did a vehicle cause an injury to Mrs. McGuire there was no potential for coverage under the uninsured motorist policy provision because it required the injury to come as a result of the vehicle not a bullet fired from an auto or any other location. It is sad that Mrs. McGuire was injured by a criminal firing a weapon at someone else and unfortunately – since most criminals are not marksmen – hit and injured her. Regardless, there was no possibility that the UM coverage applied and the court correctly affirmed the trial court.


© 2021 – Barry Zalma

 

 

Спонсоры

We are 100% funded for October.

Thanks to everyone who helped out. 🥰

Xephula monthly operating expenses for 2024 - Server: $143/month - Backup Software: $6/month - Object Storage: $6/month - SMTP Service: $10/month - Stripe Processing Fees: ~$10/month - Total: $175/month

Xephula Funding Meter

Please Donate Here

Поиск
Категории
Больше
Health
Plaintiff Must be an Insured to be Defended
Even the Eight Corners Rule Cannot Stretch a Policy to Provide Coverage Asbestos Plaintiffs Ran...
От Barry Zalma 2022-09-20 12:49:14 0 4Кб
Другое
Private Limitation of Action Provision Defeats Tardy Claim
A Partial Denial Starts the Running of the Private Limitation of Action Read the full article at...
От Barry Zalma 2021-03-05 13:39:07 0 3Кб
Другое
Fraud Perpetrators Give Up
Fraud Perpetrators Give Up Insurer Sues Fraud Perpetrators to Defeat Fraudulent Claim only...
От Barry Zalma 2024-07-09 12:50:48 0 1Кб
Politics
ALERT: LIBERALS PUSHING BIDEN TO DISBAND MILITARY BRANCH!
We need every branch of the military and at the end of the day, they all serve a purpose....
От Meme King 2020-11-21 14:33:26 0 7Кб