Auto Accidents Newsletters

Punitive Damage Exclusions in Motorists Insurance

Some automobile insurance policies have clauses that specifically exclude the payment of punitive or exemplary damages against an insured. Punitive or exemplary damages do not pay for bodily injuries or property damage. They are awarded over and above payment for those items. Punitive or exemplary damages are intended to punish the person who caused the injuries or damage or to make that person an example to deter others from such conduct.

Tort Liability of Owners/Operators of Private Motor Vehicles

While the owners and operators of private motor vehicles sometimes think of their possession of auto insurance as totally eliminating any potential tort liability on their parts, such owners and operators remain subject to the tort system to the extent that their insurance coverage does not encompass part or all of their legal liability for an incident that has caused personal injury or property damage to another person. Such a situation can arise, for example, where a court judgment reflecting injury or damage caused by an insured private vehicle owner or operator exceeds the limits of his or her policy, or where the insured's failure to provide required notice to an insurer or cooperate in the defense of a legal action causes the insurer to assert that it is not required to provide coverage for the loss under the policy.

Setoffs and Uninsured Motorist Insurance Policies

Some state statutes allow uninsured motorist insurance companies to setoff amounts that an insured received from workers compensation, Social Security, and settlements with a liability insurance company. Therefore, if an insured were injured in a car accident while driving in the course of his or her employment, the insurance company could offset the uninsured motorist benefits in the full amount of the insured's workers compensation judgment.

Attorneys Retained by Auto Insurers: Duty to the Insured

When a lawsuit is filed against an automobile insurance company's insured for damages allegedly suffered by a claimant in an automobile accident with the insured, the insurance company has a duty to defend the insured. A part of the insurance company's duty can be the right to retain an attorney for the insured's defense and to pay that attorney's fee. Because the insurance company selects and pays the defense counsel, questions arise regarding who is the attorney's client and whether the attorney owes a duty to only the insured or to both the insured and the insurance company.

Liability of Non-Manufacturing Seller in Automotive Products Liability Cases

A plaintiff in an automotive products liability case against the manufacturer or seller of a motor vehicle generally has to prove that the vehicle at the time of sale contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk of death, personal injury, or property damage when the vehicle was used for its intended purpose and that the defect caused an accident or similar incident, such as a vehicle fire, that resulted in the damage or loss for which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages. Under traditional legal principles, any party involved in the chain of transactions leading up to the retail sale of the vehicle, including the dealer who sold the car or truck, could be held liable in such a case. Motor vehicle dealers, like any party against whom a legal action is brought, would like to limit their potential liability to matters for which they can be shown to have a direct and undeniable responsibility.