Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A08-1315 Larry Benjamin Johnson, Appellant, vs. Brian Cletus Cummiskey, et al., Respondents. Filed May 26, 2009 Affirmed Ross, Judge Le Sueur County District Court File No. 40-CV-06-727 Gerald L. Maschka, Jorun Groe Meierding, Maschka, Riedy & Ries, 201 North Broad Street, P.O. Box 7, Mankato, MN 56002-0007 (for appellant) Roger H. Gross, Timothy J. Crocker, Gislason & Hunter, LLP, 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55416-3600 (for respondents) Michael A. Bryant, Bradshaw & Bryant, PLLC, 1505 Division Street, Waite Park, MN 56387 (for Amicus Curiae Minnesota Association for Justice) Considered and decided by Ross, Presiding Judge; Halbrooks, Judge; and Johnson, Judge. SYLLABUS Minnesota`s No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act does not require that motorcycle insurance policies written to provide only limited underinsured motorist coverage under a limits-less-paid structure be reformed to provide full underinsured motorist coverage under a damages-less-paid structure.

OPINION ROSS, Judge A driver whose car had only $30,000 of liability insurance coverage struck a motorcyclist, causing the motorcyclist $134,000 in damages. The motorcyclist recovered $34,000 from the car`s driver and the driver`s insurer. The motorcyclist then sought the balance from his own policy`s underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage. He sued his insurer after it applied the limits-less-paid clause of his policy to pay him only a portion of his remaining damages, deducting the $34,000 already paid to him. Injured

motorcyclist Larry Johnson appeals from the district court`s summary judgment decision dismissing his claim in favor of his insurer, Illinois Farmers Insurance Company. We are asked to decide whether the No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act invalidates the limitsless-paid clause of Johnson`s policy with Illinois Farmers and instead requires Illinois Farmers to pay Johnson using the damages-less-paid method. Because we conclude that the No-Fault Act does not require a motorcycle insurance policy that provides some UIM coverage to provide all UIM coverage required of policies for other types of vehicles, we affirm. FACTS The facts relevant to this appeal are undisputed. In July 2005, Brian Cummiskey`s Mercury Grand Marquis collided with Larry Johnson`s Harley-Davidson, causing Johnson at least $134,000 in damages. Cummiskey was 100% at fault, but he carried only $30,000 in automobile liability coverage. Johnson sued to recover his damages

2

from Cummiskey and from Johnson`s own insurance provider, Illinois Farmers Insurance Company. Johnson settled with Cummiskey for $34,000--$4,000 from Cummiskey and $30,000 from Cummiskey`s insurer--and claimed that he also was entitled to the $100,000 maximum of UIM coverage under his own policy with Illinois Farmers. But the UIM provision of Johnson`s policy contains a limits-less-paid reducing clause, so Illinois Farmers agreed to pay Johnson only $66,000, calculated by subtracting from his policy`s $100,000 limit the $34,000 he had already received from Cummiskey and Cummiskey`s insurer. The limits-less-paid clause that Illinois Farmers relies on and which triggered this dispute states as follows: We will pay an insured person for unpaid damages resulting from a motor vehicle accident . . . but not more than: . . . [t]he lesser of the difference between the limit of uninsured (underinsured) motorist coverage and the amount paid to the insured person by any party held to be liable for the accident. The district court agreed with Illinois Farmers and applied this reducing clause by its express terms, granting Illinois Farmers` motion for summary judgment and limiting Johnson`s recovery for UIM coverage to $66,000. Johnson appeals. ISSUE Does the No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act require a motorcycle insurance policy to be reformed to provide full UIM coverage using a damages-less-paid structure, which is statutorily required of policies insuring other types of vehicles, because the motorcycle policy provides some UIM coverage?

3

ANALYSIS Johnson contests the district court`s summary judgment decision against him. Because no factual disputes exist, we review summary judgment to determine whether the district court correctly applied the law. State by Cooper v. French, 460 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Minn. 1990). We hold that it did. Johnson argues that the district court based summary judgment on its erroneous understanding of Minnesota`s No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn. Stat.

Download A08-1315, Larry Benjamin Johnson, Appellant, vs. Brian Cletus Cummiskey, et al.,

Minnesota Law