Uninsured Motorist Benefits Not Owed in Purported Hit-and-Run Motor Vehicle Accident

Plaintiff was a passenger in his girlfriend’s car when they were rear ended by an at-fault vehicle. After stopping at a safe location, the occupants of both vehicles exited their vehicles to determine if there were any damages or injuries. Finding none at the scene, they all agreed that there was no need to contact the police, exchange insurance, or personal information.

Subsequently, Plaintiff began complaining of injuries. He was taken to an emergency room where he was diagnosed with a concussion. Two potentially applicable insurance policies provided uninsured motorist (UM) coverage. Both included a “hit-and-run” scenario as within the definition of an “uninsured motorist” triggering UM coverage. The Defendant insurance companies both argued before the Trial Court that the at-fault vehicle was not a “hit-and-run” vehicle. The Trial Judge agreed and dismissed the case in favor of the insurance companies. An appeal was taken.

The question presented was whether the Plaintiff could maintain a claim for uninsured motorist (UM) coverage from the two insurance company defendants. This solely depended upon the definition of a “hit-and-run” vehicle. The term “hit-and-run” was not defined by either insurance policy or by Michigan case law. An insurance contract is interpreted like any other contract. Thus, contract principles are applied. A court must interpret and apply the plain meaning of the words in a contract. Ambiguities are adverse to an insurance company and in favor of providing insurance coverage (since they wrote the policies).

The Appellate Court found no ambiguity with the term “hit-and-run.” The at-fault party did not “run.” He actually stopped, but everyone decided against exchanging information. The Court of Appeals wrote that for a “hit-and-run,” the driver would be unidentifiable and unknown. Also, the “run” would have to occur before the opportunity to exchange information.

Click on the link to read the court ruling in Wasik v. Auto Club Ins. Ass’n.

ABOUT ALEXANDER & ANGELAS, P.C.

Alexander & Angelas, P.C. represents defendants in civil liability litigation across Michigan and Northern Ohio. The firm’s practice areas include insurance defense litigation, premises liability, motor carrier (trucking) defense, corporate and commercial litigation, construction defect litigation, auto negligence, insurance coverage disputes, emergency casualty response services, alternative dispute resolution, subrogation claims, workers’ compensation, employment law, and liquor liability.

Attorneys practice in all state and federal courts in Michigan, including Wayne County (Detroit), Macomb County (Mount Clemens), Oakland County (Pontiac), Washtenaw County (Ann Arbor), and Genesee County (Flint). Legal services are also provided in Northern Ohio. Since its founding in 1992, the firm has litigated over 4,000 civil cases.

A 24/7 Emergency Hotline is available (800-219-0007) for trucking and insurance company clients. When an accident requires an immediate response to protect evidence, members of the firm quickly launch an investigation with the assistance of well-qualified accident investigators, crash reconstructionists, mechanical engineers, civil evidence photographers, and independent adjusters positioned throughout Michigan and Northern Ohio.

Alexander & Angelas, P.C. measures its performance based upon three key metrics: aging of claims, indemnity expense, and legal defense costs. The firm refuses to over-litigate cases merely to increase legal fees, and strives to resolve matters within one year from initial case assignment.

Visit Alexander & Angelas online at https://www.alexanderandangelas.com/ for more information. Partner Peter A. Angelas is available to discuss a confidential matter.