State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Myers, 316 Ga. App. 152

DeAnna Myers’s disabled adult ward, D. M., was sexually assaulted in the back seat of a car and Myers sued the driver for damages.
State Farm issued the auto policy to Jesse Johnson; the wife owned the insured vehicle.
D. M. was in the back seat during a February 20, 2008 trip for medical transport; Dondi Johnson assaulted D. M., pled guilty to sexual battery.
State Farm sought a declaratory judgment that its policy did not cover the underlying damages; Myers cross-moved for summary judgment.
The trial court granted Myers’s summary judgment and denied State Farm’s; State Farm appealed for reversal.
The issue is whether the underlying damages arose from the ownership, maintenance, or use of the car as required for coverage.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do damages arise from use of the car?	Myers: damages result from use because proximity in the moving car enabled the assault.	State Farm: damages did not arise from use; injuries were not causally connected to the car’s operation.	No; injuries did not arise from the use of the car; policy not coverage.

Davis v. Criterion Ins. Co., 179 Ga. App. 235 (Ga. App. 1986) (requires causal connection between use of vehicle and injury)
Payne v. Twiggs County School Dist., 269 Ga. 361 (Ga. 1998) (proximity in a moving vehicle did not create the required causal connection)
Hicks v. Walker County School Dist., 172 Ga. App. 428 (Ga. App. 1984) (vehicle structure not enough; attack while riding not covered)
O’Dell v. St. Paul Fire &c. Ins. Co., 223 Ga. App. 578 (Ga. App. 1996) (under similar policy language, injury not shown to arise out of use)