Kelly Ramm, et ux v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington
34542-4
Wash. Ct. App.Jun 6, 2017Background
- Kelly Ramm pulled his car over, put the transmission in park, left the engine running, unbuckled, and leaned out the driver’s door to vomit.
- While leaning out, he passed out, fell forward, struck his head on the pavement, and sustained serious injuries requiring over $10,000 in medical treatment.
- Ramm submitted a personal injury protection (PIP) claim under his auto policy with Farmers Insurance; Farmers denied coverage.
- Farmers relied on Tyrrell and related authority, arguing a "motor vehicle accident" requires the vehicle to be operated as a motor vehicle and a parked vehicle is not being operated.
- The Ramms sued for breach of contract; the trial court granted Farmers summary judgment on the PIP claim and dismissed the breach claim; the Ramms appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether injuries from falling out of a parked car qualify as a "motor vehicle accident" under the PIP policy | Ramm contended Tyrell and related authority allow coverage where the injury is connected to the vehicle even if not traditional vehicle-on-vehicle contact | Farmers argued a "motor vehicle accident" requires the vehicle to be operated as a motor vehicle; a parked car is not being operated and therefore no PIP coverage | Court held no coverage: Ramm was not operating the vehicle when injured, so the incident is not a "motor vehicle accident" under controlling precedent |
Key Cases Cited
- Tyrrell v. Farmers Insurance Co. of Washington, 140 Wn.2d 129 (2000) (defines "motor vehicle accident" to require operation of the vehicle as a motor vehicle)
- Farmers Ins. Co. of Wash. v. Grelis, 43 Wn. App. 475 (1986) (construes "motor vehicle accident" to involve forceful contact involving a vehicle or person)
- Roller v. Stonewall Ins. Co., 115 Wn.2d 679 (1990) (insurance policy interpretation is a question of law; apply ordinary meaning)
- Lyons v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, 181 Wn.2d 775 (2014) (summary judgment reviewed de novo)
- PEMCO Ins. Co. v. Sch/ea, 63 Wn. App. 107 (1991) (discusses nexus between injury and essential transaction of vehicle use)