 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Arn v. McLean2/18/2005
{ } This case involves a claim for underinsured-motorist ("UIM") coverage under umbrella policy No. 35-03-9984-0 issued by State Farm and Fire Casualty Company to Carol and Terence McLean. The policy was originally effective on February 21, 1989, had liability limits of $1,000,000, and was written without uninsured-motorists ("UM") or UIM coverage. As the applicant, Mr. McLean originally rejected UM/UIM coverage. Subsequently, on April 7, 1997, the McLeans both signed a written form, rejecting UM/UIM coverage for the policy. In particular, the form stated:
{ } "I (we) acknowledge and agree that I (we) have been offered Uninsured Motor Vehicle Coverage in an amount equal to the limits of my (our) Personal Liability Umbrella Policy. However, I (we) choose to reject Uninsured Motor Vehicle Coverage.
{ } "I (we) understand that this acceptance/rejection will apply to this policy, the current and future renewals of the policy, and on all replacement policies unless I (we) later make a written request to change the coverage."
{ } The policy was renewed thereafter without UM/UIM coverage. On February 21, 2002, when the policy was renewed, State Farm included a paragraph on the renewal certificate stating:
{ } "You have been provided the opportunity to purchase Uninsured Motor Vehicle Coverage, including underinsured motor vehicle protection in an amount equal to your limits for bodily injury liability coverage. A named insured or an applicant has declined to purchase Uninsured Motor Vehicle Coverage (including underinsured motor vehicle protection). If you want to purchase Uninsured Motor Vehicle Coverage or have questions, please contact your agent."
{ } On July 12, 2002, Mrs. McLean was involved in an auto accident with a van that was being driven by Russell Arn and was owned by Bellbrook Canoe Rental. At the time, the umbrella policy was in effect. In addition, the McLeans had an underlying automobile insurance policy with State Farm, with liability and UM/UIM limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident. Mrs. McLean was seriously injured in the accident and received injuries to her right foot and ankle and left arm and leg. Ultimately, the driver of the van filed a personal-injury action against Mrs. McLean, who then filed a counterclaim, based on the bodily injuries she had received. The McLeans also filed a third-party complaint against State Farm, claiming that they were entitled to UIM benefits under the umbrella policy.
{ } Subsequently, State Farm filed a motion for summary judgment on the coverage issue. The McLeans then filed a response, as well as a cross-motion for summary judgment. In a brief entry, the trial court granted summary judgment to State Farm and overruled the McLeans' motion for summary judgment. The court also entered a Civ.R. 54(B) certification, because of the presence of other pending issues.
{ } In support of their appeal, the McLeans assert the following single assignment of error:
{ } "The trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of State Farm and against the McLeans dismissing their cross-claim for uninsured motorist coverage to the limits of their personal umbrella policy, and denying their cross motion."
{ } After considering the record and applicable law, we find the assignment of error without merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
I.
{ } To decide whether a trial court properly granted summary judgment, we review the decision de novo, which means that "we apply the standards used by the trial court." Brinkman v. Doughty (2000),140 Ohio App.3d 494, 496, 748 N.E.2d 116. Summa
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|