Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Success Stories of Personal Injury Lawyers Directory US Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Canada Personal Injury Lawyers Directory Personal Injury Lawyers Resource Directory
Search Lawyers by Zip Code
facebook.com/injury.usa

  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Tapio v. Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co.

11/29/2000

ovisions that are more general when there is an apparent conflict. State v. Greger, 1997 SD 14, , 559 NW2d 854, 864. When it enacted SDCL 58-11-9.3, the legislature explicitly provided that exclusions, such as the one used here, are permissible. This legislative mandate will be given priority over other, more general, provisions. In certain situations, the owner of a vehicle may not be able to secure affordable coverage unless an unacceptable driver is excluded. In those situations, it is "in the best interests of the parties and the public to require the insurer to continue liability coverage on the express condition that the named insured agree the insurer will not be liable for any claims based on conduct of the unacceptable driver." State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. Dressler, 738 P2d 1134, 1138 (ArizApp 1987). See also Wright v. Rodney D. Young Ins. Agency, 905 SW2d 293 (TexApp 1995) (finding that a restrictive endorsement did not violate public policy by excluding coverage for negligent entrustment claim against insured); Brown v. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co., 409 NE2d 253 (OhioCtApp 1978) (financial responsibility laws not violated by restrictive endorsement). When it enacted SDCL 58-11-9.3, the legislature created this limited exception in furtherance of those policy concerns. We are bound by its determination.


[ ] Because this limitation on coverage is permissible under SDCL 58-11-9.3, it will be read pursuant to its clear and unambiguous language. Delores agreed that she would not be insured for any accident or claim arising out of the operation of her vehicle by her son, Sean. The alleged negligent entrustment at issue arose as a result of Sean's operation of her vehicle. Therefore, Grinnell is not obligated to provide coverage.


[ ] Judgment reversed.


[ ] MILLER, Chief Justice, and SABERS, AMUNDSON and KONENKAMP, Justices, concur.






Page 1 2 3 

South Dakota Personal Injury Attorneys    Personal Injury Lawyers


  to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.

Personal Injury Lawyers Brain Injuries Spinal Cord Injuries
Quadriplegia and Paraplegia Back Injuries Ruptured & Herniated Disks
Bulging Disk Neck Injuries Dog Bites
Toxic Mold Product Liability Fire Accidents
Trucking Accidents Boating Accidents Car Accidents
Plane Crashes Medical Malpractice Motorcycle Accidents
Wrongful Death Personal Injury Lawsuits Testimonial
FDP  |   RSS Feeds  |  Articles  |  Jobs  |  Leads  |  Partner Websites
DUI Defense  |  SiteMap  | PI Blog  | Trading Partners | Attorney Registration  | PI Case Laws  | FAQ | Personal Injury Forum
 | Personal Injury Lawyers Directory  | Success Stories  | Press Releases
Copyright © 2005. “National Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (NAPIL)”. All rights reserved.
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE