Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Thompson

778 N.W.2d 526 (N.D. 2010) · Supreme Court of North Dakota · February 17, 2010 · No. No. 20090250

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota reversed a district court judgment requiring Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Company to provide coverage and a defense for Shelly Thompson following an intentional collision. The court held that Shelly was neither a named insured nor a permissive operator, so North Dakota's Financial Responsibility Laws did not require minimum coverage for her conduct and the insurance policy controlled. The court concluded that the policy's intentional-acts exclusion permitted Grinnell to deny coverage.

Holdings

  1. Shelly Thompson was an insured under the policy but was not the named insured. Norman Thompson alone was the named insured because he was identified as such in the policy declarations.
  2. The Financial Responsibility Laws do not require any minimum level of coverage for a nonpermissive operator who is neither the named insured nor a person using the vehicle with the named insured's express or implied permission.
  3. Because Shelly Thompson was a nonpermissive operator outside the statutory minimum-coverage mandate, the policy controlled and permitted Grinnell to exclude coverage for her intentional collision.
  4. Summary judgment was proper because the parties identified no genuine issue of material fact and the dispositive issues were legal questions concerning statutory and policy interpretation.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether North Dakota's Financial Responsibility Laws require minimum liability coverage for a spouse or family member who drives the named insured's vehicle without permission.
  2. Whether Shelly Thompson was a named insured under Norman Thompson's policy because the policy defined 'you' and 'your' to include a resident spouse.
  3. Whether the policy's intentional-acts exclusion could exclude coverage for Shelly Thompson's intentional collision when she was a nonpermissive operator.
  4. Whether the district court properly granted partial summary judgment to Foltz, FBF Leasing, and Continental and denied Grinnell's summary-judgment motion.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (33)

  • Kambeitz v. Acuity Ins. Co., 2009 ND 166, ¶ 8, 772 N.W.2d 632(followed)
  • Bragg v. Burlington Res. Oil & Gas Co. LP, 2009 ND 33, ¶ 5, 763 N.W.2d 481(followed)
  • State v. Brown, 2009 ND 150, ¶ 15, 771 N.W.2d 267(followed)
  • In re M.W., 2009 ND 55, ¶ 6, 764 N.W.2d 185(followed)
  • Schleuter v. Northern Plains Ins. Co., 2009 ND 171, ¶ 8, 772 N.W.2d 879(followed)
  • ACUITY v. Burd & Smith Constr., 2006 ND 187, ¶ 7, 721 N.W.2d 33(followed)
  • Ziegelmann v. TMG Life Ins. Co., 2000 ND 55, ¶ 6, 607 N.W.2d 898(followed)
  • Nationwide Mut. Ins. Cos. v. Lagodinski, 2004 ND 147, ¶ 9, 683 N.W.2d 906(followed)
  • Hughes v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 236 N.W.2d 870, 877, 883-85 (N.D. 1975)(distinguished)
  • Odom v. Farmers Ins. Co., 216 Ariz. 530, 169 P.3d 120, 122 n.1 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2007)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 33.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…