Savoie v. Grange Mut. Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 01 October 1993
• Docket Number: No. 92-952,92-952
• Citation: 67 Ohio St.3d 500,620 N.E.2d 809
• Parties: SAVOIE, Admr., Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee and Cross-Appellant; Motorists Mutual Insurance Company, Appellee.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

Page 500

67 Ohio St.3d 500

620 N.E.2d 809

SAVOIE, Admr., Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. GRANGE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee and Cross-Appellant; Motorists Mutual Insurance Company, Appellee.

No. 92-952.

Supreme Court of Ohio.

Submitted March 17, 1993.

Decided Oct. 1, 1993.

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

1. Each person who is presumed to have been damaged as a result of a wrongful death claim may, to the extent of his or her damages, collect from the tortfeasor's liability policy up to its per person limits subject to any per accident limit. Liability policy provisions which purport to consolidate wrongful death damages suffered by individuals into one "each person" policy limit are unenforceable. (State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rose [1991], 61 Ohio St.3d 528, 575 N.E.2d 459, and paragraphs one and two of the syllabus of Burris v. Grange Mut. Cos. [1989], 46 Ohio St.3d 84, 545 N.E.2d 83, overruled; Wood v. Shepard [1988], 38 Ohio St.3d 86, 526 N.E.2d 1089, applied and followed.)

2. Insurers may contractually preclude intrafamily stacking--the stacking of uninsured/underinsured limits of policies and coverages purchased by family members living in the same household. Insurers may not contractually preclude interfamily stacking--the aggregation of uninsured/underinsured limits of policies purchased by two or more people who are not members of the same household. (Hower v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. [1992], 65 Ohio St.3d 442, 605 N.E.2d 15, overruled; Karabin v. State Auto. Mut. Ins. Co. [1984], 10 Ohio St.3d 163, 10 OBR 497, 462 N.E.2d 403, and paragraph one of the syllabus of Dues v. Hodge [1988], 36 Ohio St.3d 46, 521 N.E.2d 789, limited.)

3. An underinsurance claim must be paid when the individual covered by an uninsured/underinsured policy suffers damages that exceed those monies available to be paid by the tortfeasor's liability carriers. (Hill v. Allstate Ins. Co. [1990], 50 Ohio St.3d 243, 553 N.E.2d 658, overruled.)

4. Each person, who is covered by an uninsured/underinsured policy and who is presumed to be damaged pursuant to R.C. 2125.01, has a separate claim subject to a separate per person policy limit. (Wood v. Shepard [1988], 38 Ohio St.3d 86, 526 N.E.2d 1089, applied; Paragraph two of the syllabus of Dues v. Hodge, supra, limited.)

The facts in this case have been stipulated by all the parties. On September 28, 1989, Christina L. Savoie was killed in an automobile accident caused by Gary F. Miller, who was driving the automobile in which Christina was a passenger. The automobile operated by Gary Miller, a 1982 Honda Accord, was owned by Earl R. Miller. Earl Miller had given his son, Gary, permission to operate the automobile. David L. Byland was also injured in this accident when the car driven by Gary Miller crashed into his truck. The collision, the instantaneous death of Christina Savoie, and the injuries to David Byland were all proximately caused by the negligence of Gary Miller.

The Honda operated by Gary Miller and owned by Earl Miller was covered by a Grange Mutual Casualty Company automobile insurance policy. The limits for liability for this policy were $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident.

There were also in effect two uninsured/underinsured insurance policies from Motorists Mutual Insurance Company. Each policy provided coverage in the amount of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident.

Under the provisions of the first policy with Motorists, Policy No. 4246-06-200902-07A ("Motorists Policy I"), Donald Savoie, the decedent's father, was the named insured. Mary Savoie, the decedent's mother, was a listed driver on the policy.

Under the second policy with Motorists, No. 4246-04-200901-01D ("Motorists Policy II"), Donald Savoie was the named insured with Mary Savoie, Christina Savoie and Debbie Savoie, the sister of the decedent, being listed as drivers.

Mary Savoie, the duly appointed administrator of her daughter Christina's estate, filed a wrongful death action against Gary Miller and Earl Miller for all persons sustaining loss by the death of Christina. She also sought recovery for the entire class of injured persons against Motorists' underinsured coverage. David Byland also made a claim against Gary and Earl Miller through Grange for the injuries he incurred as a result of the automobile accident. Mary Savoie asserts Grange paid David Byland $75,000 in full and final settlement of his claim.

On June 26, 1990, Mary Savoie, in her capacity as administrator, filed a complaint for declaratory judgment in the Holmes County Court of Common Pleas. In this complaint, Mary, as administrator, asked that the court determine the various rights and obligations between herself, as the decedent's mother, Donald Savoie, as the decedent's father, Debbie Savoie, as the decedent's sister, Grange, as the tortfeasor's liability insurer, and Motorists, as the provider of underinsured coverage to Mary Savoie, Donald Savoie and Debbie Savoie (collectively, "the Savoies").

In its initial findings of fact and conclusions of law, the trial court determined that the Savoies were entitled to collect up to $300,000 from the tortfeasor's insurer, Grange. The trial court also found that the limits of the two Motorists uninsured/underinsured policies in which the Savoies were named insureds could not be "stacked" or combined. Finally, the trial court found that the Savoies were not permitted to collect upon their underinsurance coverage because their own policy limits were identical to the limits of the tortfeasor's liability policy.

On August 22, 1991, the court filed amended findings of fact and conclusions of law which came to the same ultimate conclusions as the first entry.

On October 30, 1991, the trial court filed second amended findings of fact and conclusions of law. The court, after citing State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rose (1991), 61 Ohio St.3d 528, 575 N.E.2d 459, concluded the Savoie claimants collectively were limited to the "$100,000 each person" limit in the tortfeasor's insurance policy with Grange. The court reiterated its holding regarding the uninsured/underinsured policy with Motorists.

Mary Savoie, as administrator, appealed the trial court's decision. On April 17, 1992, the court of appeals for Holmes County determined that the trial court had erred when it held that the Savoies were collectively restricted to the "$100,000 each person" language in the tortfeasor's liability policy with Grange. Instead, the court of appeals held that the Savoie claimants were collectively subject to the "$300,000 each accident" limit. The court of appeals affirmed the trial court's treatment of the Savoies' underinsurance policies.

The cause is before this court pursuant to the allowance of a motion and cross-motion to certify the record.

Frase, Weir, Baker & McCullough and Robert E. Weir; and Norman S. Davitt, Coshocton, for appellant and cross-appellee.

Reynolds & Reynolds and Craig R. Reynolds, Wooster, for appellee and cross-appellant.

Baker, Meekison & Dublikar, Gregory A. Beck, Carol A. Costa and Rosemarie A. Hall, Canton, for appellee Motorists Mut. Ins. Co.

Scanlon & Henretta Co., L.P.A., J. Thomas Henretta and Ann Marie O'Brien, Akron, for amicus curiae Ohio Academy of Trial Lawyers.

PFEIFER, Justice.

Mary Savoie, as administrator, raises three questions of automobile insurance law, which have been the subject of continued redefinition and controversy within this court: What are the effects of "per person" limits in liability policies on multiple wrongful death claimants? When is it permissible to combine or stack uninsured/underinsured motorist policies? To what extent do underinsurance policies provide coverage to their own named insureds facing inadequate compensation from a tortfeasor's liability insurer?

I

Mary Savoie, administrator, contends that the decedents' parents and sister are each entitled to recover up to $100,000 under the tortfeasor's "per person" limitations in his liability policy and are collectively subject to the $300,000 per occurrence limit. Grange argues that the multiple claimants must be merged under the wrongful death statute into a single cause of action brought by the administrator and are, therefore, confined to a single combined "per person" recovery limit.

In a refreshing moment of candor, Motorists' attorney in oral argument urged this court to:

" * * * use the statute in a wrongful death [claim] to get to a position where all the insurance companies know that when there is a death claim, no matter what the policy says, we have in fact a full policy exposed. That would reduce so much litigation. It would reduce so much complexity. It would allow us in the insurance industry to at least focus on what the claim is and then we would know. That's the posture that Motorists Mutual would like to present to the court in this case, and if the court takes that posture, then, certainly Grange Mutual owes $225,000."

The liability policy issued by Grange provides:

"The limit of liability shown in the Declarations for 'each person' for Bodily Injury Liability is our maximum limit of liability for all damages, including damages for care, loss of services or death, arising out of bodily injury sustained by any one person in any one auto accident. Subject to this limit for 'each person', the limit of liability shown in the Declarations for 'each accident' for Bodily Injury Liability is our maximum limit of liability for all damages for bodily injury resulting from any one accident. * * * This is the most we will pay regardless of the number of

"1. Insureds;

"2. Claims made;

"3. Vehicles or premiums shown in the Declarations; or

"4. Vehicles involved in the accident."

In an attempt to narrowly interpret its own insurance policy provision, Grange ignores the elevated status of wrongful death claims in Ohio.

To manage the presentment of wrongful death claims the General Assembly enacted R.C. 2125.02, which charges the estate's...