Jackson v. General Acc. Ins. Co., 51243

• Citation: 720 S.W.2d 428
• Decision Date: 25 November 1986
• Docket Number: No. 51243,51243
• Parties: Cathy JACKSON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GENERAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

Page 428

720 S.W.2d 428

Cathy JACKSON, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. GENERAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE CO., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 51243.

Missouri Court of Appeals,

Eastern District,

Division Two.

Nov. 25, 1986.

Laura B. Allen, Evans & Dixon, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.

Charles L. Merz, St. Louis, for plaintiff-respondent.

SMITH, Presiding Judge.

Defendant appeals from an order of summary judgment establishing that defendant's policy of automobile insurance furnishes unlimited coverage for injuries sustained by plaintiff from the negligence of an underinsured motorist. We reverse.

The policy in question contains several pertinent provisions. First is what is described as the "Declarations" page. It contains the names of the insured, a description of the vehicles insured and a listing of the coverages provided, the limits of such coverage as to each vehicle insured and the premium charged for each coverage. It contains the following declaration:

                "COVERAGE DESCRIPTIONS              CAR 1                       CAR 2"
                 ---------------------              -----                        -----
                                             Limit           Prem.         Limit       Prem
                Underinsured Motorists      50,000           Incl.        50,000       Incl
                

The policy also contains a section on Underinsured Motorists Coverage. It

contains the following pertinent provisions:

                                                   "SCHEDULE
                    Limit of Liability each accident        Premium
                                                Auto 1         Auto 2
                    $ *                          $ *            $ *
                     ----------                  -----          -----
                

[*These lines were left blank in the policy as issued.]

Limit of Liability

The limit of liability shown in the Schedule for this coverage is our

maximum limit of liability for all damages resulting from any one accident.

This is the most we will pay regardless of the number of:

1. Covered persons;

2. Claims made;

3. Vehicles or premiums shown in the Declarations, or

4. Vehicles involved in the accident.

However, the limit of liability shall be reduced by all sums paid because

of the bodily injury by or on behalf of persons or organizations who may be

legally responsible ... ."

It is plaintiff's contention that because the limits of liability were left blank in the Schedule no maximum liability for underinsured motorist coverage is provided by the policy.

In State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Thomas, 549 S.W.2d 616 (Mo.App.1977) [1,2] the court stated the applicable rule in interpreting insurance contracts:

"The rule is firmly established in Missouri that insurance policies, like other contracts, must be given reasonable interpretations and in construing the terms of a policy 'the courts discharge their full duty when they ascertain and give effect to the intention of the parties, as disclosed by the contract they have entered into.' ... Plain and unambiguous language must be given its plain meaning, ... and this rule applies to restrictive provisions in insurance contracts."

The Declarations page of the contract here makes indisputably clear that the maximum coverage provided under the underinsured motorist coverage is $50,000 per vehicle. The Schedule section does not expressly change that limitation. It is not reasonable to conclude that the blanks left in the Schedule section reflect a different intention than that...