Belding v. DeMoulin
828 N.W.2d 890
Wis. Ct. App.2013Background
- Ronald and Antoinette Belding renewed State Farm UM policies in fall 2009, each covering one vehicle, with separate UM limits.
- In 2010 Ronald, driving the Ranger, was injured by an uninsured driver; UM paid $100,000 per person under that policy.
- The Beldings sought to stack UM limits by applying the Villager policy, purchased on the other vehicle.
- State Farm denied Villager UM coverage due to a drive other car exclusion that excludes a vehicle not described in the policy.
- Wis. Stat. § 632.32(6)(d) (antistacking ban) and § 632.32(5)(j) (drive other car exclusion) were both in effect 2009–2011, creating a statutory conflict that this court resolves.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether drive other car exclusions barred UM stacking during 2009–2011 | Belding | State Farm | Drive other car exclusion barred by antistacking prohibition; stacking permitted |
Key Cases Cited
- Welch v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 122 Wis.2d 172 (1985) (drive-other-car exclusion invalid when it prevented UM stacking)
- Blazekovic v. City of Milwaukee, 234 Wis.2d 587 (2000) (UM stacking considerations under Wisconsin law)
- Nicholson v. Home Ins. Cos., 137 Wis.2d 581 (1987) (legislative impact on stacking and related statutes)
- Teschendorf v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 293 Wis.2d 123 (2006) (summary judgment standard and statutory interpretation)
- Clark v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 218 Wis.2d 169 (1998) (exclusions not prohibited by (6) or other law must be analyzed)
- Westphal v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 266 Wis.2d 569 (2003) (drive other cars exclusion purpose and stacking policy)