Minnesota Car Insurance limits inadequate in Canadian context - Hartley v. Security National

October 05, 2017, Kitchener, Ontario

Posted by: Robert Deutschmann, Personal Injury Lawyer

Hartley V. Security National (ONCA 2017)

Date of Decision: June 21, 2017


Mr. Hartley was in a car accident while riding his motorcycle in Minnesota. He was hit by truck owned, operated and insured by the State of Minnesota. Mr. Hartley sued the State for damages was bus limited by their $500,000 cap.

Mr. Hartley settled for the $500,000 although his injuries warranted more. The settlement he received was inclusive of all legal fees and disbursements. After costs, Mr. Hartley was left with a settlement of $386,500. He then turned to sue his own auto insurer Security National under his OPCF 44R which provides $1 million in coverage for underinsured drivers.

Security National denied the claim on the basis that:

  1. Minnesota was not an inadequately insured motorist within the meaning of OPCF 44R, and that the shortfall was the result of statutory immunity
  2. The insurer claimed that the American legal fees were not recoverable under the OPCF 44R

The motion judge ordered in favour of Mr. Hartley on both issues.

Upon review of the facts the Court of Appeal of Ontario agreed with the motion judge that Minnesota was an “inadequately insured motorist”, however, they disagreed that the legal fees were recoverable. The Court of Appeal pointed to the language in the OPCF 44R:

“the identified owner or identified driver of an automobile for which the total motor vehicle liability insurance or bonds, cash deposits or other financial guarantees as required by law in lieu of insurance obtained by the owner or driver is less than the limit of family protection coverage…”

The Court took the position that the “other financial guarantees as required by law in lieu of insurance’ includes a legislated obligation by an uninsured state to indemnify its employees. The shortfall in damages and the limits on damages provided by the State of Minnesota triggers indemnity under OPCF 44R. The Court found that special damages could not provide compensation for costs incurred in securing compensatory damages as that would undermine the contractual agreement between parties.

 

Posted under Accident Benefit News, Automobile Accident Benefits, Car Accidents, Personal Injury

View All Posts

About Deutschmann Law

Deutschmann Law serves South-Western Ontario with offices in Kitchener-Waterloo, Cambridge, Woodstock, Brantford, Stratford and Ayr. The law practice of Robert Deutschmann focuses almost exclusively in personal injury and disability insurance matters. For more information, please visit www.deutschmannlaw.com or call us toll-free at 1-866-414-4878.

It is important that you review your accident benefit file with one of our experienced personal injury / car accident lawyers to ensure that you obtain access to all your benefits which include, but are limited to, things like physiotherapy, income replacement benefits, vocational retraining and home modifications.

Practice Areas

  1. Car accidents
  2. Motorcycle accidents
  3. Automobile accident benefits
  4. Catastrophic injury
  5. Brain injury
  6. Paraplegia and Quadriplegia
  7. Spinal cord injury
  8. Drunk driving accidents
  9. Concussion syndrome
  1. Wrongful death
  2. Bicycle accidents
  3. Disability insurance claims
  4. Slip and fall injury
  5. Fractures or broken bone injury
  6. Pedestrian accidents
  7. Chronic pain
  8. Truck accidents
  9. Amputation and disfigurement

Personal Injury Blog

Feb 16, 2018
Applicant's Treatment Plans Do Not Show Treatment Reasonable and Necessary - Applicant v Pembridge LAT 17-000162
Feb 15, 2018
Self Driving Cars and Ethics
Feb 14, 2018
Applicant Commences Action After Two-Year Limitation Period - ST v Economical LAT 16-003034
Feb 13, 2018
Using Social Media to Serve Notice of a Claim
Feb 12, 2018
Applicant is in an accident but treatments not reasonable and necessary - Applicant v Aviva LAT 16-001928
Feb 11, 2018
Arbitrator prefers more thorough assessment of applicant's experts - ND v Aviva LAT 16-002568

More Personal Injury Articles » 
Review our services

Connect with us

Facebook Twitter Linkedin Youtube Google