UPDATE: The Auto Insurer may not have to pay for back-seat transmission

UPDATE: The Auto Insurer may not have to pay for back-seat transmission

The Missouri Court of Appeals ruled last summer that GEICO may be required to pay $5.2million to a woman who claimed she contracted an STD from her ex-boyfriend. GEICO was the insurer of the vehicle in question. See "Auto Insurance May Have to Pay For Transmission That Allegedly Occurred In Back Seat" (June 10, 2022). The headline uses slightly different words to make the same joke. The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that decision last week. The decision made earlier did not mean that GEICO would be required to pay the full amount. The appeal focused on whether GEICO had...

The Missouri Court of Appeals ruled last summer that GEICO may be required to pay $5.2million to a woman who claimed she contracted an STD from her ex-boyfriend. GEICO was the insurer of the vehicle in question. See "Auto Insurance May Have to Pay For Transmission That Allegedly Occurred In Back Seat" (June 10, 2022). The headline uses slightly different words to make the same joke. The Missouri Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that decision last week. The decision made earlier did not mean that GEICO would be required to pay the full amount. The appeal focused on whether GEICO had the right to intervene in the case, and not whether its auto policy covered this type of injury. The Missouri statute allows parties to arbitrate disputes, and the plaintiff agreed in advance to seek recovery from the insurers. Mo. Stat. Stat. SS 537.065.2. The parties didn't tell GEICO that they planned to do so, and it only learned about the $5.2 million arbitration award after the fact. To confirm the award, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit (never mind why, this's how arbitration works and if it's possible it's even less boring than it sounds), and GEICO attempted to intervene. The appellate court ruled that GEICO was out-of- luck for the reasons that you can read about in the earlier post. The Missouri Supreme Court overturned the decision on January 10 and remanded the case for further proceedings. This is because the reason is very simple, and probably the reason why this analysis is three paragraphs long. Section 537.065.2 states that the insurer has "[b]eft a judgment may [be entered]" in such a situation, the insurer "shall be allowed to intervene as a matter ....". Here, the lower court allowed GEICO to intervene but only after the judgment had been entered, not before, as the statute requires. The apparent confusion between "before", and "after" might be explained if I reread the earlier decision. But, I don't wish to do that. The Missouri Supreme Court believes that "before" and, more specifically, "after" are distinct. It does not believe it was necessary to explain why. The final outcome of this case remains to be determined. GEICO has the right to intervene in this lawsuit but could lose the arbitration dispute. We will return to this topic at a future date. The more interesting coverage dispute is still pending in federal courts. You can read the previous post to get an initial impression based on my GEICO policy. Did you miss our previous article... https://wawawiiwa.com/comedians/congratulations-for-not-catching-jack-the-ripper