trending ATTORNEYS on baker sterchi
{{item.T}}
Kansas City, Missouri
2400 Pershing Road, Suite 500, Kansas City, Missouri 64108-2533
Another Win for the Limits-to-Limits UIM Definition: AMCO Ins. Co. v. Williams
Amid efforts by insureds and a few recent decisions by the Missouri Court of Appeals refusing to enforce so-called “limits-to-limits” definitions in underinsured motorist cases, the Eight Circuit has dealt another blow on the side of insurers. The federal appellate court affirmed on March 16, 2017 the district court’s summary judgment in favor of AMCO Insurance Company. This decision came two days after the Supreme Court of Missouri likewise enforced limits-to-limits definition of “underinsured motor vehicle” in Swadley v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Co., although the timing resulted in Swadley not being cited by the Eighth Circuit.
AMCO’s definition provided that an underinsured motor vehicle was “a land motor vehicle or trailer of any type to which a bodily injury liability bond or policy applies at the time of the accident but its limit for bodily injury liability is less than the limit of liability for this coverage.” This definition, which calls for the tortfeasor’s liability coverage limit to be compared to the UIM limit, can be contrasted from other definitions rendering a vehicle underinsured if the tortfeasor’s coverage is merely less than the insured’s total damages. The court determined that policy’s definition was clear and unambiguous and that no UIM coverage was available because the tortfeasor in the case before it had coverage greater than the limit of UIM coverage in the AMCO policy.
The insureds made the argument seen more and more recently that the policy’s otherwise clear terms were ambiguous because they conflicted with the declarations page, which listed a coverage limit of $100,000 with no other limitations or exclusions. The court aptly rejected that argument because it sought to read the declarations in isolation rather than interpreting the policy as a whole as required by Missouri law. Further, rejecting another ambiguity argument by the insureds, the court distinguished between policy provisions regarding the amount of coverage due once coverage has been triggered and those governing whether the policy affords coverage in the first place, finding that any ambiguity as to the former is immaterial to the latter.
Missouri Law Blog
Kansas City Area Returns to Pre-Pandemic Jury Verdict Trends ...
Missouri Law Blog
When Artificial Intelligence leads to Genuine Stupidity ...
About Missouri Law Blog
Baker Sterchi's Missouri Law Blog examines significant developments, trends and changes in Missouri law on a broad range of topics of interest to Missouri practitioners and attorneys and businesses with disputes subject to Missouri law. Learn more about the editor, David Eisenberg.
Subscribe via email
Subscribe to rss feeds
RSS FeedsABOUT baker sterchi blogs
Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice LLC (Baker Sterchi) publishes this website as a service to our clients, colleagues and others, for informational purposes only. These materials are not intended to create an attorney-client relationship, and are not a substitute for sound legal advice. You should not base any action or lack of action on any information included in our website, without first seeking appropriate legal or other professional advice. If you contact us through our website or via email, no attorney-client relationship is created, and no confidential information should be transmitted. Communication with Baker Sterchi by e-mail or other transmissions over the Internet may not be secure, and you should not send confidential electronic messages that are not adequately encrypted.
The hiring of an attorney is an important decision, which should not be based solely on information appearing on our website. To the extent our website has provided links to other Internet resources, those links are not under our control, and we are not responsible for their content. We do our best to provide you current, accurate information; however, we cannot guarantee that this information is the most current, correct or complete. In addition, you should not take this information as a promise or indication of future results.
Disclaimer
The Missouri Law Blog is made available by Baker Sterchi Cowden & Rice LLC for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. Your use of this blog site alone creates no attorney client relationship between you and the firm.
Confidential information
Do not include confidential information in comments or other feedback or messages related to the Missouri Law Blog, as these are neither confidential nor secure methods of communicating with attorneys. The Missouri Law Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state.
