Steele v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co.

Summary

The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, holding that a child passively riding as a passenger in a daycare van was not an insured under the policy’s uninsured motorist provisions. The court concluded that Missouri’s uninsured motorist statute and Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law require coverage for persons insured under the liability policy, including users whose vehicle use may impose legal liability, but do not mandate coverage for passive passengers without a realistic right of control. Because the policy expressly defined use as physically controlling or attempting to control the vehicle, the child was not covered.

Holdings

1. The child was not an insured under the policy because he was neither within Category A nor using the vehicle within Category B's definition of use. As a passive passenger, he did not physically control or attempt to physically control the van.
2. Section 379.203 requires uninsured-motorist coverage for persons insured under the liability policy who are legally entitled to recover damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured motor vehicle; it does not require coverage for every passenger regardless of whether the passenger is insured under the liability policy.
3. The MVFRL requires coverage for owners, operators, and users only to the extent that Missouri law imposes liability on them for damages arising from ownership, maintenance, or use of the vehicle. A passenger is not a required insured merely by being present in the vehicle; liability based on passenger use requires a realistic right of control.
4. Summary judgment for Shelter was proper because the undisputed policy language and facts established that the child was not an insured and that neither the UM statute nor the MVFRL required coverage for him.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Missouri's uninsured-motorist statute requires coverage for a passenger who is not an insured under the vehicle's liability policy.
2. Whether Missouri's Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law requires a liability policy to cover a passive passenger as a user of the vehicle.
3. Whether the child was an insured under Shelter's policy despite the policy's express definition of use as physically controlling or attempting to physically control the vehicle.
4. Whether summary judgment for Shelter was proper.

Disposition

affirmed