Potomac Ins. Co. of Ill. v. Adams
| Docket Number: | 2006-CA-01852-COA Linked Case(s): 2006-CA-01852-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 12-09-2008 Opinion Author: IRVING, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Underinsured motorist insurance - Covered automobile Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Chandler, Griffis, Barnes, Ishee, Roberts, and Carlton, JJ. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 09-05-2006 Appealed from: WASHINGTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: W. Ashley Hines Disposition: SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF Case Number: CI 20-0090 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | POTOMAC INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS |
BRENDA B. BETHANY,
GERALD L. KUCIA |
||
| Appellee: | MARY GALE ADAMS, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF HER MINOR CHILDREN, MARY CATHERINE ADAMS AND ANDREW EDWARDS ADAMS | HIAWATHA NORTHINGTON, RANDALL A. SMITH, EDWARD GOTHARD |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Insurance - Underinsured motorist insurance - Covered automobile |
| Summary of the Facts: | Mary Adams filed a lawsuit, individually and on behalf of her minor children, against Potomac Insurance Company of Illinois and other entities, in an attempt to recover under her employer’s underinsured motorist insurance which was provided by Potomac. The court granted summary judgment to Adams, finding that the policy in question covered Adams. Potomac appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | At the time of the accident, Adams, a Louisiana resident, was in Mississippi on business for her employer, Careington International. The vehicle in which Adams was driving was rented in Jackson and paid for with a Careington corporate credit card. The UIM portion of Careington’s insurance policy states that the covered automobiles for purposes of the UIM provisions are “any auto[s] owned” by Careington. It is undisputed that Adams was not in a vehicle literally owned by Careington at the time of her accident. However, section C of the UIM coverage states that any person “occupying a covered auto” is considered an insured, and section F states that a “covered auto” is an automobile “owned or leased by you” or an automobile used as a substitute for a damaged or stolen automobile. Although the rental contract was filled out with Adams’ name listed, it was clear that Careington was the true lessee of the vehicle. The car was rented solely for Careington’s business purposes, and the rental was paid for entirely by Careington. As such, the vehicle was “owned or leased” by Careington. According to the definition of a “covered auto” in section F, the rental vehicle was a covered automobile because it was leased by Careington. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
