Plaintiff’s auto insurer not obligated for coverage as driver at fault carried insurance under the Delaware Motorist Protection Act.

The plaintiff/insured, injured (along with seven others) while she was a passenger in a third-party’s vehicle, was seeking gap coverage from her own auto policy after exhaustion of the third-party driver’s PIP coverage. Because of the many people injured, the plaintiff exhausted her portion of the PIP benefits quickly and sought to obtain benefits under her own policy for the difference between the amount of PIP received from the third-party PIP benefits and the maximum benefit under her policy. However, the plaintiff’s auto insurance carrier denied her claim, and she filed for breach of contract. The plaintiff’s insurer argued that it was not liable for breach of contract because the insurance policy stated that it would cover injuries sustained “while occupying or by involvement with any motor vehicle other than your auto … only if the other motor vehicle is not insured under the Delaware Motorist Protection Act.” The driver who was at fault for the auto accident carried insurance under the act, therefore, the plaintiff’s insurer was not obligated for coverage.

_{Case Law Alerts, 4^th Quarter, October 2016. Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2016 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}