Widow Loses Bid for Death Benefits for Husband Killed by Tow Truck
A federal judge has ruled that death benefits were not payable to a widow who said that her husband had been struck after he exited a tow truck and it backed over him, reasoning that he had not been “in or on” the tow truck at the time of his death.
March 19, 2019 at 05:16 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
A federal district court in California has ruled that death benefits were not payable to a widow who said that her husband had been struck after he exited a tow truck and it backed over him, reasoning that he had not been “in or on” the tow truck at the time of his death.
The Case
According to Donna Lamb, her husband Stephen Robert Lamb called a tow truck after his vehicle became disabled and he was riding in the tow truck when the driver pulled over to investigate a problem. Ms. Lamb asserted that her husband exited the tow truck, at which point the driver backed over him, causing his death.
Ms. Lamb sought benefits under a common carrier death benefit rider to a group accidental death insurance policy issued by Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company.
Transamerica denied coverage, Ms. Lamb sued, and Transamerica moved for judgment on the pleadings.
The Policy
The Transamerica policy's common carrier death benefit rider stated that Transamerica:
will pay the benefit shown on the Schedule . . . subject to the following conditions: . . . (2) the accident causing the Injury must occur while riding as a fare paying passenger in or on a licensed public conveyance operated by a Common Carrier for the regular transport of passengers.
The District Court's Decision
The district court granted Transamerica's motion, finding that the policy's “plain terms” precluded coverage.
In its decision, the district court agreed with Transamerica that there was no coverage because Mr. Lamb was not killed while riding as a fare paying passenger in or on a licensed public conveyance operated by a common carrier for the regular transport of passengers, as the policy required.
The district court pointed out that Ms. Lamb's complaint “clearly” stated that Mr. Lamb had exited the tow truck before he was killed. The district court added that even assuming that the tow truck qualified as a common carrier, Mr. Lamb was not “in or on” the tow truck at the time of his death but had “got[ten] out of the vehicle.”
Accordingly, the district court concluded, under the policy's plain terms, Transamerica was justified in denying benefits.
The case is Lamb v. Transamerica Premier Life Ins. Co., No. CV 18-3255 FMO (MRWx) (C.D. Cal. March 14, 2019). Attorneys involved include: For Donna Lamb, individually, Plaintiff: Lawrence Patrick Grassini, LEAD ATTORNEY, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA; Marshall James Shepardson, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA; Robert Brian Reagan, Jr, Roland Gregory Wrinkle, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA. For Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company, formerly known as Monumental Life Insurance Company, Monumental Life Insurance Company, Defendants: Chakameh Ganji, Misty A Murray, Vivian I Orlando, Hinshaw and Culbertson LLP, Los Angeles, CA.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Sides With Lyft Driver in Contractual Dispute Over $1M Uninsured Motorist Coverage
5 minute readFormer CVS Exec Faces Trade Secrets Suit for Allegedly Helping Chickasaw Nation Case
3 minute readFacing a Shrinking Talent Pool, Insurance Defense Firms Are Fighting to Add Attorneys
6 minute readVirus Insurance Policy Doesn't Cover Restaurant's COVID Closure, California Supreme Court Says
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Playing the Talent Game to Win
- 2A&O Shearman Adopts 3-Level Lockstep Pay Model Amid Shift to All-Equity Partnership
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4BD Settles Thousands of Bard Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
- 5A RICO Surge Is Underway: Here's How the Allstate Push Might Play Out
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250