02-0261 Folkman v. Quamme

Listen to this article

Mother and two sons were injured in a two-car accident while riding in an insured auto driven by one of the sons. The insurer claimed that the $50,000 per accident limit was the limit of its liability.

The family claims that since mother was liable to passenger-son as the sponsor of driver-son’s license and father was liable to mother and passenger-son as the sponsor of driver-son’s license, and since mother, father, and driver-son were each separately insured under the policy, insurer owed $125,000: $50,000 for driver-son’s liability to mother, $25,000 for mother’s sponsor liability to passenger-son, and $50,000 for father’s sponsor liability.

We conclude that, when read together, Paragraph A of “Insuring Agreement” and the “Split Liability Limits” endorsement are ambiguous. They can be reasonably read to provide that the per person and per accident limits for bodily injury on the declaration page apply to each insured liable in one accident, as the insureds contend; or they can be reasonably read to apply regardless of the number of insureds, as the insurer contends. Since the former construction is more favorable to the insured, that is the one we adopt.

We reverse the circuit court’s order denying the insureds’ motion for a declaratory ruling in their favor, and its order dismissing the insurer upon deposit of $50,000 with the clerk of court, and we remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist III, Brown County, Warpinski, J., Vergeront, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: R. George Burnett, Green Bay

For Respondent: James W. Mohr Jr., Hartford