REL: Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance sheets of Southern Reporter. "In other words, the Downeys have ‘forfeit’ UIM coverage."
However, the Downeys did not meet the threshold of showing any condition under which their lack of notice could be excused. The Supreme Court found that the Downeys were at all relevant times in possession of the policy, and it clearly provided UIM coverage. Travelers denied the claim and the Downeys sued. Subsequently, and with different counsel, the Downeys notified Travelers of the accident for the first time and that they were making a claim under their underinsured motorist policy. Thompson and his insurance company from all liability arising out of the accident. The Downeys, in consideration of $10,000 and while represented by counsel (but without having notified Travelers Property Casualty Insurance Company that they were doing so), executed a general release to discharge Mr.
The Downeys had underinsured motorist coverage. At the time of the accident, multiple insurance policies were in force. In 2007, Delbert and Lou Ann Downey were stopped at an intersection on their motorcycle when a vehicle driven by Wyndell Thompson failed to stop and hit them. The Court was asked whether the failure of an insured to give notice of a proposed settlement to an insurance company causes the insured to forfeit underinsured motorist coverage (UIM), regardless of the insured’s actual knowledge of that coverage, and regardless of prejudice to the insurance company if the insured has a copy of the policy that contains the coverage. The Federal District Court for the Northern District of Alabama certified a question to the State Supreme Court.
0 kommentar(er)
