Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Travelers v. Wilson.

Date: 06-27-2002

Case Number: 20000227-CA

Judge: Billings

Court: In the Utah Court of Appeals

Plaintiff's Attorney: "_new">Steve S. Christensen, Salt Lake City.

Defendant's Attorney: "_new">Terry M. Plant and "_new">H. Justin Hitt, Salt Lake City.

Description:
1 Keith Wilson and his minor daughter Trisha Wilson were passengers involved in an auto accident in Utah. The relevant facts leading up to the accident are undisputed.


Background


2 Around May 1, 1996, Keith Wilson accepted a job in Salt Lake City as a driver for a trucking company. The Wilson family was living in New York. The family moved out of their New York residence and into Keith's parents' home, also in New York, sold much of their furniture, and placed other personal property in storage. Keith requested that his dispatcher route his next trucking assignment through Salt Lake City so he could look for an apartment there. Keith also renewed his automobile insurance policy with Travelers Insurance(1) while in New York, listing a New York address, and told Travelers that he was planning to move to Utah. The insured vehicle was registered in New York and remained garaged in New York at the time of the accident. The policy had personal liability limits of $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident, and $10,000 for property damage. The policy also included mandatory personal injury protection (PIP) benefits of $50,000, as required under New York law. Keith purchased optional supplementary underinsured motorist (SUM) coverage with limits of $25,000 per person, $50,000 per accident. The policy stated that "[t]he maximum amount payable under Sum coverage shall be the policy's Sum limits reduced and thus offset by motor vehicle bodily injury liability insurance policy or bond payments received from, or on behalf of, any negligent party involved in the accident, as specified in the Sum endorsement."


3 On June 30, 1996, Keith left with his minor daughter Trisha, then age ten, on a long-haul cross-country trucking assignment. Keith's wife and younger daughter remained in New York. The trip route required them to go through various states. The pair spent the Fourth of July in Texas, and the renewal Travelers policy became effective on July 5, 1996. Keith and Trisha arrived in Salt Lake City on July 18, 1996, and spent approximately two days looking at apartments and filling out several apartment application forms. The remaining leg of Keith's trucking assignment required that he go to Oregon and Washington after leaving Utah. However, on July 21, 1996, while still in Salt Lake City, both Keith and Trisha were passengers in a car owned and operated by a family friend when they were involved in an auto accident. Keith was admitted to a local hospital and was released on August 4, 1996. Trisha was also treated for injuries in Salt Lake City. A few days after being released from the hospital, Keith and Trisha returned directly to New York. The family eventually moved to Utah in November of 1996.


4 Keith stated in his deposition that at the time of the accident, his driver license was issued in New York, he did not have a Utah address, he was registered to vote in New York, and he paid income taxes to the State of New York. In addition, after the accident, he applied for social security disability benefits in New York, listing a New York address.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the
full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome:
¶16 In conclusion, because the Travelers policy does not fall within the scope of section 31A-21-101(1), Utah law that allows the stacking of Sum benefits does not apply. Thus, under Utah and New York law, the provision of the Wilsons' insurance policy prohibiting stacking of Sum benefits is enforceable.(5) Therefore, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Travelers and the denial of the Wilsons' motion for summary judgment.

Plaintiff's Experts:
Unavailable
Defendant's Experts:
Unavailable
Comments:
C.L.

About This Case

What was the outcome of Travelers v. Wilson.?

The outcome was: ¶16 In conclusion, because the Travelers policy does not fall within the scope of section 31A-21-101(1), Utah law that allows the stacking of Sum benefits does not apply. Thus, under Utah and New York law, the provision of the Wilsons' insurance policy prohibiting stacking of Sum benefits is enforceable.(5) Therefore, we affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Travelers and the denial of the Wilsons' motion for summary judgment.

Which court heard Travelers v. Wilson.?

This case was heard in In the Utah Court of Appeals, UT. The presiding judge was Billings.

Who were the attorneys in Travelers v. Wilson.?

Plaintiff's attorney: Steve S. Christensen, Salt Lake City.. Defendant's attorney: Terry M. Plant and H. Justin Hitt, Salt Lake City..

When was Travelers v. Wilson. decided?

This case was decided on June 27, 2002.