Summary
The Delaware Supreme Court held that an insured may stack underinsured motorist coverage after any one policy establishes that the tortfeasor's vehicle qualifies as underinsured under 18 Del. C. § 3902. The court reversed summary judgment for Horace Mann Insurance Company and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an insured may stack UIM policy limits after one policy independently satisfies the statutory threshold establishing that the tortfeasor's vehicle is underinsured.
- Whether stacking is permitted to determine the extent or amount of UIM coverage after UIM coverage has been triggered by one policy.
Holdings
- Once one UIM policy establishes that the tortfeasor was driving an underinsured motor vehicle under 18 Del. C. § 3902(b)(2), stacking the claimant's UIM coverage is permitted to determine the extent or amount of available UIM coverage.
- The Superior Court erred in granting summary judgment to Horace Mann because the absence of a threshold underinsurance determination under the Horace Mann policy alone did not bar stacking after another policy had triggered UIM coverage.
Key quotations
“Given the legislative purpose to fully compensate victims for the damages inflicted by impecunious tortfeasors, we hold that stacking is permitted once the statutory threshold for UIM coverage has been satisfied by any one policy.” (842 A.2d at 1236)
“Following the principles announced in Hurst, since nothing in the statute prohibits stacking, and stacking enables innocent claimants to be more fully compensated for their injuries, we hold that stacking to determine the extent or amount of UIM coverage is permitted after one UIM policy establishes that the tortfeasor was driving an "underinsured motor vehicle."” (842 A.2d at 1238)
Factual background
Thomas Deptula was seriously injured when Constance Carty's vehicle rear-ended the vehicle he was driving for his employer. Carty had $100,000 in bodily-injury liability coverage, while Deptula had access to $300,000 in UIM coverage under his employer's policy and $100,000 in UIM coverage under his personal Horace Mann policy. After accepting Carty's liability limits and the employer-policy UIM limits, Deptula sought benefits under the Horace Mann policy to obtain full compensation for his injuries.
Procedural history
After settling with the tortfeasor for the $100,000 liability-policy limit and receiving the $300,000 limits of the employer's UIM coverage, Deptula sought the $100,000 limits of his personal Horace Mann UIM policy. The Superior Court granted summary judgment to Horace Mann, concluding that the tortfeasor's vehicle was not underinsured for purposes of triggering Horace Mann's coverage because Horace Mann's individual UIM limit did not exceed the tortfeasor's liability limit. The Delaware Supreme Court reversed and remanded.
Remand instructions
The matter was remanded to the Superior Court for further action consistent with the opinion; the Supreme Court did not retain jurisdiction.