410_C189
ATV
INELIGIBLE AS COVERED AUTO
|
Automobile
|
ATV
|
|
Underinsured Motorist
|
Covered Auto
|
Jennifer Boniey was injured in an accident involving an all-terrain
vehicle in which she was a passenger. The vehicle was owned by Brian Kuchinski. At the time of the accident, it was being driven
“off road.”
Boniey was insured under two policies
issued by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. When Kuchinski’s insurer denied coverage, Boniey
filed a claim with State Farm for uninsured motorist coverage. State Farm
denied coverage, stating that an all-terrain vehicle did not qualify as an
uninsured motor vehicle while not operated on public roads.
Boniey sued State Farm for coverage. The
lower court found in favor of Boniey; State Farm
appealed.
The State Farm policy
provided: “An uninsured vehicle does not include a motor vehicle...Designed for
use mainly off public roads, except while on public roads.” The issue on appeal
was whether this provision violated the intent and purpose of the West Virginia uninsured
motorist statute. That statute provided, in relevant part: “[No policy or
contract of bodily injury liability insurance, or property damage liability
insurance, covering liability arising from the ownership, maintenance or use of
any motor vehicle, shall be issued or delivered in this state] unless it shall
contain an endorsement or provisions undertaking to pay the insured all sums
which he shall be legally entitled to recover as damages from the owner or
operator of an uninsured motor vehicle, within limits which shall be no less
than the requirements of section two [§ 17D-4-2], article four, chapter
seventeen-d of this code, as amended from time to time[.]”
In reaching its decision in
favor of Boniey, the lower court had concluded that
the all- terrain vehicle was a “motor vehicle” within the meaning of the
statute. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia found that this analysis was
flawed. Instead, the court focused on the fact that uninsured motorist coverage
was intended to place a motorist injured by the negligence of an uninsured
motorist in the position he or she would have been in if the negligent motorist
had complied with the financial responsibility law. Specifically, the court
noted that in West Virginia,
the only motor vehicles whose owners were required to maintain a liability
insurance policy were those vehicles required to be registered and licensed in
the state. The court also noted that all- terrain vehicles were expressly
excepted from the requirements of registration and licensing. The court
reasoned that because an all-terrain vehicle was not required to have liability
insurance coverage under the financial responsibility law, it was not an
“uninsured motor vehicle” within the meaning of the uninsured motorist statute.
It then concluded that a provision in a motor vehicle liability insurance
policy excluding an off-road all-terrain vehicle from uninsured motorist
coverage did not violate the intent and purpose of the uninsured motorist
statute.
The decision of the lower
court was reversed, and the case was remanded for proceedings consistent with
the opinion of the Court of Appeals.
Boniey vs. Kuchinski-No. 34152-Supreme Court of Appeals of
West Virginia-March 24, 2009-677 Southeastern Reporter 2d 922