Robinson v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.
| Docket Number: | 2009-CA-00864-COA Linked Case(s): 2009-CT-00864-SCT |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-19-2010 Opinion Author: Ishee, J. Holding: Affirmed. |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Insured - Residing in same household - Section 83-11-103(b) - Counter-affidavits - M.R.C.P. 6(b) Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Barnes, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, J. Concur in Part, Concur in Result 1: Maxwell, J., concurs in part and in the result without separate written opinion. Concurs in Result Only: Irving, J., concurs in result only without separate written opinion. Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 05-05-2009 Appealed from: SMITH COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Robert G. Evans Disposition: GRANTED SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF STATE FARM Case Number: 2007-257 |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | Brief(s) Available: | ||
| Appellant: | James Robin Robinson, Jr. |
EUGENE COURSEY TULLOS |
|
|
| Appellee: | State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company | WILLIAM M. DALEHITE JR., JAMES SETH MCCOY | ||
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 - Insured - Residing in same household - Section 83-11-103(b) - Counter-affidavits - M.R.C.P. 6(b) |
| Summary of the Facts: | In September 2005, James Robinson lived with his parents and brother at 493 Smith County Road. His sister, Christy Robinson Best, lived in a trailer approximately 100 yards across the road at 444 Smith County Road. At the time that her brother James had an accident on September 6, 2005, Christy had an insurance policy with State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company which contained underinsured motorist coverage that would cover James if it were shown that Christy resided with her brother at 493 Smith County Road or he with her. State Farm filed a motion for summary judgment based on its contention that James was not a resident of Christy’s household at the time of the accident. After summary judgment had been entered in favor of State Farm, James filed a document styled response to motion for summary judgment that had affidavits attached from James’s mother, father, brother, and a man who claimed he was dating Christy; all swore in their affidavits that Christy was residing with her parents at the time of James’s accident. State Farm then filed a Supplemental Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Response as Untimely, Inadequate, and Unresponsive. The circuit court again ruled that State Farm should be granted summary judgment. James appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Under section 83-11-103(b), a relative of the named insured residing in the same household may be considered an insured for purposes of uninsured-motorist coverage. Christy’s State Farm policy provides, under the uninsured-motorist section, that the “insured” is defined as “1. you; 2. Your spouse; [and] 3. your relatives . . . .” The policy then describes a relative as “a person related to you or your spouse by blood, marriage or adoption who resides primarily with you.” It is undisputed that James is Christy’s brother; however, that fact alone does not make him a relative entitled to coverage under her policy unless he can prove that she resided primarily with him at the time of the accident or he with her. The fact that she was not residing in his household at the time of the accident is the basis for the circuit court granting State Farm’s motion for summary judgment. James has failed to offer any evidence in opposition to Christy’s testimony that she maintained her residence at 444 Smith County Road, in a trailer home approximately 100 yards across the street from her parents’ home at 493 Smith County Road where her brother lived; and she never indicated that she intended to abandon her residence at 444 Smith County Road. She testified that she did help take care of her brother at her parents’ home after his accident, but she testified clearly that she considered 444 Smith County Road as her residence. Considering this evidence in the light most favorable to James, the circuit court did not err in granting State Farm’s motion for summary judgment. With regard to the counter-affidavits submitted by James, M.R.C.P. 6(b) prohibits a judge from receiving documents filed after the specified period, unless the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect. Otherwise, the counter affidavits will be stricken. James filed no motion showing excusable neglect. Therefore, the circuit court could not consider the untimely filed counter-affidavits. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
