Meyers v. Miss. Ins. Guar. Ass'n
| Docket Number: | 2002-CA-00362-SCT Linked Case(s): 2002-CA-00362-SCT |
|
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 06-19-2003 Opinion Author: Graves, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - General commercial liability coverage - Bodily injury exclusion Judge(s) Concurring: Pittman, C.J., Smith, P.J., Waller, Cobb and Carlson, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz, J. Dissenting Author : McRae, P.J. Dissent Joined By : Easley, J. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - PERSONAL INJURY |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 12-03-2001 Appealed from: Jackson County Circuit Court Judge: Dale Harkey Disposition: Summary judgment granted in favor of the Appellee. Case Number: CI-95-0179(1) |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | Daniel Meyers |
ANDRE FRANCIS DUCOTE
WAYNE E. FERRELL, JR. |
||
| Appellee: | Mississippi Insurance Guaranty Association | LAWRENCE CARY GUNN, JR. |
|
|
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 - General commercial liability coverage - Bodily injury exclusion |
| Summary of the Facts: | Summary judgment was granted in favor of Mississippi Insurance Guaranty Association, against Daniel Meyers, regarding the applicability of general commercial liability coverage for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Coverage for bodily injury sustained from the use of an automobile is excluded under the policy. Meyers appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Meyers argues that the theories of liability asserted, negligent hiring and failure to maintain adequate safety programs allow recovery under the policy for auto accident injuries despite the exclusion for bodily injury damages arising out of the use of an automobile. Coverage under a general commercial liability policy with an auto-exclusion for injuries arising out of the use of an automobile should not vary depending upon the theories of liability asserted. The exclusion applies to a specific instrumentality, namely an automobile, rather than a theory of recovery. Claims of negligent entrustment, negligent supervision, and failure to train will not be recognized as independent acts of negligence sufficient to allow coverage under insurance policies, whether homeowners or GCL policies, with an auto-exclusion where the damages arise out of the use of an automobile. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
