Issue

Insurance—underinsured motorist coverage—qualification as underinsured highway vehicle—interpolicy stacking—not permitted

Summary

In a declaratory judgment action to determine the underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage available to defendant, who owned the at-fault vehicle in a fatal car crash but was not the tortfeasor (his friend was driving the car while defendant rode as a passenger), the trial court erred in granting judgment on the pleadings for defendant and thereby allowing him to recover under both his own policy and his parents' policy. Under the plain language of the Motor Vehicle Safety and Financial Responsibility Act, defendant could not "stack" the UIM coverage limits from his own policy and his parents' policy (which named defendant as an insured but did not cover his car) in order to qualify his car as an "underinsured highway vehicle" for purposes of activating his own policy's UIM coverage and bringing a UIM claim under that policy. Further, because defendant could not "stack" multiple UIM limits, his car did not meet the alternate definition of "underinsured highway vehicle" under the "multiple claimant exception" of the Act (N.C.G.S. § 20-279.21(b)(4)).

Summary from the North Carolina Reports digest (official subject index). Read the opinion →