Shelter Ins. Co. v. Gomez
306 Neb. 607
Neb.2020Background
- On May 27, 2015, a Gomez Trucking Peterbilt driven by Santos Gomez Jr. struck and killed bicyclist Jason Kraeger; negligence of the driver was undisputed.
- Gomez Trucking was insured by Shelter; the policy’s limits had been adjusted multiple times and the parties agree the limit in effect at the time of the accident was $100,000.
- Nebraska statute § 75-363 adopted parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, including 49 C.F.R. Part 387, which prescribes minimum levels of financial responsibility for motor carriers (e.g., a $750,000 floor for certain vehicles).
- Kraeger’s estate settled with the truck owners for $750,000; the owners assigned claims against Shelter and the local agent, Kate Benjamin, to the estate.
- Shelter sued for declaratory judgment that the policy limit was $100,000 and therefore Shelter’s exposure was capped; the estate argued § 75-363/Part 387 required insurers/agents to issue policies meeting the motor-carrier minimums.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Shelter and the agent; the Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed, holding the regulatory duty to obtain minimum financial responsibility rests on the motor carrier (not the insurer or agent) and that Part 387 allows carriers to satisfy requirements by combining insurance, bonds, or self-insurance.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 75-363 and 49 C.F.R. Part 387 require an insurer to issue a policy with liability limits that meet a motor carrier’s minimum financial-responsibility level | Estate: Part 387 makes any lower-limit policy unlawful; insurer must issue minimum coverage | Shelter/agent: Statute/regulation governs motor carriers; insurer has no duty to issue minimum-limits policy | Compliance obligation is on the motor carrier, not the insurer; insurer need not issue policy meeting Part 387 limits |
| Enforceability of the $100,000 policy limit | Estate: $100,000 limit is void/unenforceable under § 75-363/Part 387 | Shelter: $100,000 is enforceable; Part 387 does not alter policy terms or impose issuance duties on insurers | The $100,000 limit was enforceable as a matter of law; Part 387 does not render the policy illegal |
| Whether the insurance agent had a legal duty to advise or procure Part 387 minimum coverage | Estate: Agent was negligent for failing to advise/sell minimum coverage | Agent/Shelter: No legal duty to anticipate or procure what coverage insureds should have; insured must request desired coverage | Agent had no duty under Part 387 to procure minimum motor-carrier coverage (summary judgment for agent sustained) |
Key Cases Cited
- Steffen v. Progressive Northern Ins. Co., 276 Neb. 378, 754 N.W.2d 730 (Neb. 2008) (insurers cannot issue policies with terms less favorable than state compulsory uninsured/underinsured motorist statutes)
- Illinois Central R. Co. v. Dupont, 326 F.3d 665 (5th Cir. 2003) (Part 387’s financial-responsibility rules are directed at motor carriers and do not impose duties on insurers)
- North Carolina Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Armwood, 361 N.C. 576, 653 S.E.2d 392 (N.C. 2007) (refusing to reform insurer’s policy to Part 387 minimums; regulatory duty on carrier)
- Howard v. Quality Xpress, Inc., 128 N.M. 79, 989 P.2d 896 (N.M. App. 1999) (Part 387 places burden of compliance on motor carrier, not insurer)
- Dahlke v. John F. Zimmer Ins. Agency, 245 Neb. 800, 515 N.W.2d 767 (Neb. 1994) (agent duty principles cited regarding scope of agent’s obligation)
- Hansmeier v. Hansmeier, 25 Neb. App. 742, 912 N.W.2d 268 (Neb. Ct. App. 2018) (insurance agent generally has no duty to anticipate what coverage an insured should have)