Alfa Insurance Corp. v. Hasselle
2011 Miss. App. LEXIS 472
| Miss. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Thomas Hasselle struck his wife Shirley with their car, causing bodily injury to Shirley; both were named insureds under Alfa Insurance policy.
- Alfa originally offered $40,000 to settle the claim, which the Hasselles rejected seeking $900,000 for pain and suffering and $50,000 for medical expenses.
- Alfa later advised the $40,000 offer was a mistake because liability coverage did not exist for Shirley under the policy, though uninsured-motorist and medical-payments coverage remained.
- Alfa filed a declaratory judgment and interpled funds for Shirley’s medical expenses; the chancery court ruled Shirley was not excluded from liability coverage.
- Counterclaims by the Hasselles remained; the case was transferred to the circuit court, where Alfa obtained summary judgment on remaining claims.
- The Mississippi Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Shirley was excluded from liability coverage and awarding judgment to Alfa.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Shirley was excluded from liability coverage under the policy | Alfa argues the policy excludes any bodily injury to a covered person. | Hasselles argue the exclusion is ambiguous and violates public policy and statutory law. | Shirley is excluded from liability coverage; Alfa prevails. |
| Whether the policy language is clear or ambiguous and properly reviewed on appeal | Alfa asserts the policy language is clear and unambiguous. | Hasselles contend ambiguity defeats the exclusion. | Policy language is clear and unambiguous; no cross-appeal required to raise the issue. |
| Whether Mississippi law permits excluding family members from liability coverage | Alfa relies on Thompson and Perry to uphold family-member exclusions. | Hasselles rely on policy ambiguity and public-policy arguments opposing exclusions. | Exclusion of a family member from liability coverage is valid and enforceable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. Mississippi Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., 602 So.2d 855 (Miss. 1992) (upholds family-exclusion provision for liability coverage)
- Perry v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., 251 Miss. 544, 170 So.2d 628 (Miss. 1965) (support for excluding family members from liability coverage)
- Burns v. Burns, 518 So.2d 1205 (Miss. 1988) (abrogated spousal immunity referenced in analysis)
- Tolbert v. Southgate Timber Co., 943 So.2d 90 (Miss. Ct. App. 2006) (laudatory treatment of statutory-language stability)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Mettetal, 534 So.2d 189 (Miss. 1988) (preserves legislature’s role when not changing statutory language)