Lang v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co.

Summary

The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company in a dispute over underinsured motorist benefits arising from the death of the insureds' son. The court held that the policy's $100,000 per-person limit was reduced by the $150,000 paid by the tortfeasors, that the wrongful-death claim was subject to a single per-person limit, and that the policy unambiguously prohibited stacking underinsured motorist coverage.

Holdings

1. The policy was unambiguous. Its other-insurance provisions could reduce, but could not increase, the maximum underinsured motorist amount stated in the declarations, and paragraph two referred to other underinsured motorist coverage rather than any other form of insurance.
2. The policy's setoff clause applied to the entire $150,000 paid by both McKee and Christine, because both were liable parties and the clause covered any amount paid by or for any liable parties.
3. The Langs were limited to one recovery subject to the $100,000 per-person limit because only Martin Lang sustained bodily injury in the occurrence, and the policy expressly excluded separate limits for derivative, statutory, or other claims arising from that injury.
4. The policy's underinsured motorist limits could not be stacked across the three vehicles because the policy separately and distinctly defined uninsured and underinsured motor vehicles and expressly prohibited stacking.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the policy's other-insurance provisions conflicted with its setoff provision and created an ambiguity requiring additional underinsured motorist coverage.
2. Whether the setoff provision applied to amounts paid by both the underinsured and non-underinsured tortfeasors.
3. Whether Raymond and Rosemary Lang each had a separate underinsured motorist claim outside the policy's single per-person limit for bodily injury to Martin Lang.
4. Whether the policy's relationship between uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage required stacking of the underinsured motorist limits for the three insured vehicles.

Disposition

affirmed