In Jones v. Shelter Mut. Ins. Companies, 274 Neb. 186 ( Neb. , 2007), a passenger in a vehicle was struck by an uninsured motorist who was legally liable for the accident. The passenger and his uninsured motorist (UM) carrier brought an action to recover UM benefits under the driver's policy which excluded the passenger from the definition of “insured.”

The question for the court was whether the driver's policy provision defining “use” to include only “operation and maintenance” of the vehicle was contrary to the public policy embodied in the Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Insurance Coverage Act, the purpose of which is “to give the same protection to a person injured by an uninsured or underinsured motorist as the person would have if he or she had been injured in an accident caused by a automobile covered by a standard liability policy.”

 

According to the court, the automobile policy defined “insured” in substantially the same way under its liability and UM coverages, and although the statute required UM coverage in a policy insuring against liability for bodily injury arising out of the ownership, operation, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle, the phrase “ownership, operation, maintenance, or use” simply described the type of liability coverage a policy could offer.

 

Further, because an insurance policy is a contract between an insurance company and an insured, the insurance company has the right to limit its liability by including limitations in the policy definitions. If the definitions in the policy are clearly stated and unambiguous, the insurance company is entitled to have such terms enforced.

 

For those reasons, the Nebraska Supreme Court determined that the UM carrier's definition of “use” to include only “operation and maintenance” did not violate the public policy embodied in the Uninsured and Underinsured Motorist Insurance Coverage Act. Therefore, because Jones was not an insured under the uninsured motorist coverage afforded by the driver's policy, the priority-of-payment provisions in the policy were inapplicable to him.