 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Schlessinger v. Schlessinger5/18/1989
are entitled to receive [Personal Injury Protection] benefits, such benefits may not provide the adequate compensation contemplated by the Act."
Further, exclusion of plaintiff from liability coverage under § 10-4-706(1)(a), C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol 4A) is contrary to the intention expressed in § 10-4-702. The mere fact that relatives of the insured are specifically covered under § 10-4-707(1) (b), C.R.S. (1987 Repl. Vol. 4A), which applies only to Personal Injury Protection benefits, does not mean that the General Assembly has approved their exclusion from liability coverage. Liability coverage and Personal Injury Protection benefits are separate and distinct coverages. See Meyer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., supra.
Thus, to exclude victims such as plaintiff from receiving the liability coverage benefits set forth in § 10-4-706(1)(a) because § 10-4-707 does not specifically address their liability coverage would also require the exclusion of "all vehicle passengers and drivers or pedestrians" from liability coverage as their liability coverage benefits are also not addressed by § 10-4-707. Meyer v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., supra. This consequence was certainly not intended by the General Assembly and is contrary to the policy of the Act.
Consideration of the purpose of the Act and its provisions leads us to conclude that application of the doctrine of parental immunity to a motor vehicle accident covered by the Act would violate the public policy inherent in the Act. Indeed, only by applying the liability coverage benefits of the Act to all victims of accidents can we give consistent and harmonious and sensible effect to all parts of it. Thus, the trial court erred in ruling that the doctrine of parental immunity barred the action here at issue.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded to the district court for further proceedings consistent with the view expressed herein.
|