This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Insurance Stacking and the related topic of vehicle accidents. For more information about insurance see the pages on Wikipedia.
Insurance Stacking-Cases
1994 USAA Cas. Ins. Co. v. Alexander, 248 Va. 185, 445 S.E.2d 145.
Insurance stacking.Insured who had waived higher than minimum uninsured motorist coverage in 1984 did not alter that election by failing to return coverage limit selection notice sent to him by insurer in 1990, and as such lower coverage which had existed for several years was applicable on date of accident in 1991. For purposes of determining whether uninsured motorist coverage is available, coverage afforded by all applicable policies is stacked and compared to policy limits of defendants vehicle. Injured person who has purchased only minimum limits of uninsured motorist coverage may still recover underinsured benefits.
1984 Mitchell v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 227 Va. 452, 318 S.E.2d 288.
Underinsurance coverages under three policies cannot be stacked where language of policy clearly and unambiguously limits coverage.
1983 Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Shelton, 225 Va. 316, 302 S.E.2d 36.
Insurance stacking.Plaintiff was injured while riding in one of four cars owned by Worthy. Plaintiff was not family member of Worthy. Although class one insured may be entitled to stack medical payments coverage on multiple insured automobiles, that was not case here since plaintiff was insured of second class and is limited in his medical payments claim to coverage provided for specific vehicle he was occupying at time of accident.
1972 Lipscombe v. Security Ins. Co., 213 Va. 81, 189 S.E.2d 320.
Named insured is entitled to recover up to maximum amount of uninsured motorist coverage for each vehicle covered by single policy for which separate premium is paid.
1972 Cunningham v. Insurance Co., 213 Va. 72, 189 S.E.2d 832.
Policy covering vehicle involved in accident provides primary uninsured motorist coverage. Coverage on owned automobile not involved in accident provides only excess uninsured motorist coverage. For purposes of uninsured motorist coverage, named insured is entitled to coverage for each vehicle covered by policy for which separate premium is paid.
1971 Virginia Farm Bur. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wolfe, 212 Va. 162, 183 S.E.2d 145.
Three autos covered by one policy; stacking of medical payment coverage allowed.
1965 Bryant v. State Farm Mut., 205 Va. 897, 140 S.E.2d 817.
Plaintiff driving father’s truck; judgment against uninsured motorist collectable from both father’s policy and plaintiff’s own policy. Limiting clause of plaintiff’s policy invalid.
1963 Central Sur. Corp. v. Elder, 204 Va. 192, 129 S.E.2d 651.
Insurance stacking.Plaintiff had policy for medical payments which applied to two vehicles and contained provision that when two or more automobiles were insured, terms of policy applied separately to each. Ambiguity of policy was interpreted in favor of plaintiff.
