State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Lambert

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama
Citation291 Ala. 645,285 So.2d 917
PartiesSTATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY and Southern Guaranty Insurance Company et al. v. Ronnie LAMBERT. S.C. 346.
Decision Date15 November 1973

Pillans, Reams, Tappan, Wood, Roberts & Vollmer and Geary A. Gaston, Mobile, for appellant, State Farm Fire & Casualty Co.

Collins, Galloway & Murphy and Robert H. Smith, Mobile, for appellant, Southern Guaranty Ins. Co.

James R. Owen, Bay Minette, for appellee.

JONES, Justice.

Is the 'physical contact' requirement in a 'hit-and-run' clause in the uninsured motorist provision of an automobile liability insurance policy in derogation of the Alabama Uninsured Motorist Statute?

While the posture of the proceedings below is not entirely clear, all parties in interest concede that our answer to the foregoing question is dispositive of this appeal. We answer, as did the court below, in the affirmative; and, accordingly, we affirm. 1

This is a case of first impression in Alabama. The pertinent provisions of each policy are as follows:

'COVERAGE U--UNINSURED AUTOMOBILE COVERAGE--DAMAGES FOR BODILY INJURY CASUED BY UNINSURED AUTOMOBILES. To pay all sums which the insured or his legal representative shall be legally entitled to recover as damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured automobile because of bodily injury sustained by the insured, caused by accident and arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of such uninsured automobile; * * *

'DEFINITIONS--PART 1.

'UNINSURED AUTOMOBILE--Under Coverage U Means: * * *

'(2) a hit-and-run automobile as defined: * * *

'HIT-AND-RUN AUTOMOBILE--Under Coverage U means a land motor vehicle which causes bodily injury to an insured arising out of physical contact of such vehicle with the insured or with an automobile which the insured is occupying at the time of the accident, provided: (1) there cannot be ascertained the identity of either the operator or owner of such 'hit-and-run automobile' * * *'

The Alabama Uninsured Motorist Statute (Title 36, § 74(62a), Code of Alabama 1940 (Recomp.1958), as amended) became effective January 1, 1966, and reads as follows:

'No automobile liability or motor vehicle liability policy insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any person arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a motor vehicle shall be delivered or issued for delivery in this state with respect to any motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state unless coverage is provided therein or supplemental thereto, in limits for bodily injury or death set forth in sub-section (c) of section 74(46) of this title, under provisions approved by the commissioner of insurance, for the protection of persons insured thereunder who are legally entitled to recover damages from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles because of bodily injury, sickness or disease, including death, resulting therefrom; provided, that the named insured shall have the right to reject such coverage; and provided further, that unless the named insured requests such coverage in writing, such coverage need not be provided in or supplemental to a renewal policy where the named insured had rejected the coverage in connection with the policy previously issued to him by the same insurer.'

Appellee concedes that the physical contact requirement is valid unless the Uninsured Motorist Statute includes within its scope and purview hit-and-run drivers. Appellants conceded that if the statute does include hit-and-run drivers, the 'physical contact' provision is void as being more restrictive than the statute.

The threshold question, then, is whether the legislature by passage of the uninsured motorist statute intended to cover within the term 'uninsured motorist' a hit-and-run driver.

This question cannot be answered apart from the historical context within which the statute was passed. Automobile liability insurance has long been recognized as the only practical means for the general motoring public to provide financial responsibility concomitant with the increasing number of injured persons--fatal and non-fatal--resulting from the use of our highways. Out of the increase in the number of vehicles, their greater power and speed, and the resultant social problem of the uncompensated injured and deceased evolved the debate as to the public policy best suited to fill this need.

Primarily, two alternatives were considered. One was the Uniform Motor Vehicle Safety-Responsibility Act and the second was compulsory liability insurance. 2 Alabama, along with some 42 other states, chose the former. This public policy, as expressed in §§ 74(42)--74(83), Title 36, Code of Alabama 1940 (Recomp.1958), as amended, was adopted by the Alabama Legislature, effective January 1, 1952, and provided in substance that those who were answerable for injuries and damages resulting from their fault in the use and maintenance of an automobile who did not have automobile liability insurance, or who were otherwise unable to financially respond to such damages, would be subject to the loss of their driving privileges. 3 While this policy tended to develop an ever increasing consciousness on the part of the motoring public for the need of financial responsibility to third parties, the practical effect was nonetheless to leave a substantial number of the motorists uninsured and financially irresponsibile.

A progressive and an imaginative insurance industry moved into this gap and provided, as optional coverage, unisured motorist protection. The responsible motorist was now able for a nominally increased premium to cover not only his liability to others, but to protect himself from loss due to personal injury incurred...

To continue reading

Request your trial
57 cases
  • Weingarten v. Allstate Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Connecticut
    • 16 Septiembre 1975
    ...is an unidentified tortfeasor, there is an uninsured tortfeasor, and hence the insured must be covered. 4 State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 291 Ala. 645, 285 So.2d 917; Balestrieri v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Ins. Co., 22 Ariz.App. 255, 526 P.2d 779; Farmers Insurance Exchange......
  • Davis v. Robertson, CC941
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • 22 Abril 1985
    ...313 F.Supp. 1002 (D.P.R.1970) (applying New Jersey law); Rhault v. Tsagarakos, 361 F.Supp. 202 (D.Vt.1973); State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Lambert, 291 Ala. 645, 285 So.2d 917 (1973) (dictum); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., Inc. v. Griffin, 51 Ala.App. 426, 286 So.2d 302 (1973); Hartford Ac......
  • Hayne v. Progressive Northern Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
    • 1 Noviembre 1983
    ...Under Uninsured Motorist Coverage, 11 Creighton L.Rev. 222 (1977).9 See cases cited in note 7 supra.10 State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 291 Ala. 645, 285 So.2d 917 (1973); Halseth v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co., 268 N.W.2d 730 (Minn.1978).11 The word "means" "excludes any mean......
  • Rohret v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • 21 Marzo 1979
    ...require coverage of damage caused by an unidentified motorist without contact. Among these decisions are State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 291 Ala. 645, 285 So.2d 917 (1973); Farmers Insurance Exchange v. McDermott, 34 Colo.App. 305, 527 P.2d 918 (1974); Brown v. Progressive Mutual......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • More Uninsured/underinsured Motorist Coverage—an Addition to the Lawyers' Desk Reference
    • United States
    • Alabama State Bar Alabama Lawyer No. 74-2, March 2013
    • Invalid date
    ...(1975). This case further extended the holding reached by the Alabama Supreme Court in State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Lambert, 285 So. 2d 917 (Ala. 1973), wherein the Alabama Supreme Court determined that the physical contact requirement in a hit-and-run provision of an automobile liab......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT