Fistfights have been a fertile source of insurance law in California, most notably in the seminal case discussing a liability insurer's duty to defend it insured, Gray v. Zurich Insurance Company. Now, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled that the death of a motorist after being punched in the head by another, uninsured driver while exchanging information after a collision did not "arise out of the use" of the uninsured vehicle and is therefor not a covered loss under the deceased driver's Uninsured Motorist coverage.*
John and Eva Hogan were driving their insured automobile when it was involved in a minor collision with a motorcycle operated by Giuseppe Lionetti. While Mr. Hogan was trying to exchange information with him, Lionetti became irate and threatening. Ultimately, he punched Mr. Hogan in the head with such force that Hogan fell and struck his head on the pavement. He died of his injuries five days later. Lionetti was uninsured.
Eva Hogan made a claim on behalf of her deceased husband and herself, seeking benefits under their own Uninsured Motorist coverage. The insurer denied the claim, on the ground that Mr. Hogan's death did not "arise out of the use of an uninsured motor vehicle." The trial court granted judgment in favor of the insurer and the Court of Appeal affirmed. After discussing a number of California cases addressing the concept of losses "arising out of" motor vehicle use -- including cases involving guns going off in cars, rape committed in an automobile, and arguments over switching from high beams to low beams -- the appellate court concluded:
All of these cases share a common thread: None of the injuries arose directly from the use or operation of the vehicle. Rather, the use of the vehicle, as transportation of the tortfeasor or as 'furniture,' was merely incidental to the direct cause of the injuries sustained in each case.So it is in the case at bar. There is no dispute in this case that the immediate and direct cause of Mr. Hogan's fatal injuries was Mr. Lionetti's act of punching Mr. Hogan in the face with such force that he was knocked to the ground and hit his head on the pavement. The only role played by Mr. Lionetti's uninsured motorcycle was to transport Mr. Lionetti to the site where he then committed this crime against Mr. Hogan.
The court rejected a creative argument that the case should be deemed to arise out of the use of a motor vehicle because the fight arose while Mr. Hogan was attempting to comply with the Vehicle Code's requirement to exchange information following an accident.
The decision in California Automobile Insurance Company v. Hogan (October 29, 2003), Case No. B161245 can be found at these links in PDF and Word formats.
* In California and many other jurisdictions, "uninsured motorist" coverage must be offered as part of most automobile insurance policies. The coverage operates to pay benefits to the insured motorist when he or his passengers are injured by the actions of another party who did not carry insurance. Under the terms of the controlling statute, and the terms incorporated in each policy, the injury to the insured driver must "arise out of the use of" an uninsured motor vehicle.
Comments