The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, applying Mississippi law, has ruled that an exclusion for vehicles “furnished or available for the regular use of” the insured precluded coverage for injuries the insured had suffered while driving his employer's truck.
The Case
When Susan Tate Green crashed her car, a tire from the vehicle flew off and hit the windshield of a truck driven by James Goss.
At the time, Mr. Goss was operating an 18 wheel vehicle owned by Bigbee Transportation. He drove that truck 90 percent of the time in which he was performing his work for Bigbee Transportation. He worked every day of the week and had driven the particular route on which the accident occurred more than 100 times.
After the accident, Mr. Goss sued Ms. Green and her husband for medical expenses, lost wages, and other injuries.
Mr. Goss also sued Allstate Insurance Company, his personal insurance carrier, claiming that Allstate was his “underinsured insurance provider” and was “contractually obligated to pay any damages which exceed the Defendants' amount of insurance coverage.”
Allstate moved for summary judgment, arguing that Bigbee's truck was not one of the covered vehicles listed in its insurance policy.
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee granted summary judgment to Allstate, and Mr. Goss appealed to the Sixth Circuit.
The Allstate Policy
The Allstate policy excluded coverage for:
any damages … because of … bodily injury or property damage while in, on, getting into or out of, getting on or off, or when struck by a vehicle owned by or furnished or available for the regular use of, [the insured] or a resident which is not insured for this coverage.
(Emphases omitted.)
The Sixth Circuit's Decision
The Sixth Circuit affirmed, applying Mississippi law because Allstate had issued and delivered the policy to Mr. Goss in Mississippi, even though the accident had occurred in Tennessee.
In its decision, the circuit court ruled that the exclusion could not be “logically interpreted in two or more ways,” but, rather, that it was “clear and unambiguous.”
According to the Sixth Circuit, it excluded coverage for this accident because Bigbee's truck had been “furnished … for the regular use of” Mr. Goss.
The circuit court pointed out that Bigbee had paid Mr. Goss to drive the truck; Mr. Goss had frequently driven Bigbee's trucks during the years he worked for the company; he had driven trucks “every day of the week”; he claimed to have driven the route “[w]ay over a hundred times”; Bigbee had provided Mr. Goss with the truck, which he had driven “ninety percent of the time,” along with the preloaded trailer for “[his] weekly run”; and Mr. Goss himself had acknowledged during his deposition that he “had the regular use of a Bigbee truck and trailer.”
The circuit court concluded that the exclusion applied given that Bigbee had furnished the truck for Mr. Goss' regular use because the policy excluded coverage for injuries while driving a vehicle “furnished or available for the regular use of” Mr. Goss.
The case is Goss v. Green, No. 16-5265 (6th Cir. Dec. 2, 2016).
Steven A. Meyerowitz
Steven A. Meyerowitz, a Harvard Law School graduate, is the founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc., a law firm marketing communications consulting company. He may be contacted at [email protected].