Chute v. Amica Mutual Insurance Co. (2007)
From Judgepedia
Judge Gableman was REVERSED by the District III Court of Appeals, which held that he committed error by construing an insurance policy contract so as to dismiss an injured plaintiff’s case against another motorist’s insurance company. Judge Gableman found that an insurance company was not responsible for covering an accident that happened after its insured driver had sold the insured car to a different person who then wrecked the car and injured another person in the process. The Court of Appeals held that the insurance company was responsible for insuring the car, regardless of who owned it, even though the contract indicated that it did not cover individuals who drove the car in cases where the insured party would not have the authority to grant them permission to do so. Ultimately, the Court of Appeals found that anyone using the vehicle was "insured," where Judge Gableman had found that only the individual who purchased the insurance and owned the car was "insured."
