Son-in-law is not a “relative” under insurance policy, according to Delaware Supreme Court.
The plaintiff was trimming tree branches with his mother-in-law and father-in-law by tying a rope from the tree branches to a vehicle and driving away as the branches were cut. The intrepid plaintiff was knocked from the tree when the father-in-law rapidly accelerated and caused the rope to break. The in-laws carried an automobile policy that provided PIP benefits of up to $100,000 for a policyholder or “relative,” but only state minimum coverage for non-relatives. “Relative” was defined in the policy as “a person related to you or your spouse by blood, marriage or adoption who lives primarily with you.” The plaintiff, who did not live with his in-laws, argued that the policy limitation constituted an exclusion that was void as against public policy and, alternatively, that he was entitled to the full $100,000 in benefits rather than the state minimum $15,000 because he was a relative. The Delaware Superior Court found that the limitation was against public policy and invalid, but on appeal, the Delaware Supreme Court held that the lower court erred in determining that insurers are not entitled to distinguish among beneficiaries based on relationship status under the Delaware Financial Responsibility Law. In doing so, the court clarified that there is not a bright-line rule in Delaware that any limitations or exclusions in insurance policies based upon the relationship between the insured and the victim are invalid. The court also held that the policy’s definition of “relative” was not ambiguous because, even though the plaintiff was a relative of the policyholders by marriage, he did not live with them as required by the definition of “relative” provided in the policy.
Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, January 2016
Case Law Alerts is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent legal 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.