A woman from Chester, VA who was seriously injured in a car accident caused by an uninsured motorist is attempting to “stack” uninsured motorist coverage belonging to her wife, and her parents-in-law who live with the couple, reports Virginia Lawyers Weekly.
Kimberly R. Tucker took up a declaratory judgment action against State Farm insurance company shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in their U.S. v. Windsor decision.
Tucker alleges she was severally injured in a July 2010 car accident caused by uninsured motorist Julia Murray. Nationwide, Tucker’s insurance company, has already paid out its $100,000 limit.
Tucker’s personal injury lawsuit, asking for $499,000, was filed in Richmond Circuit Court, arguing that Murray was negligent when she collided her 2000 Mercury Mystique with Tucker’s 2005 Chevrolet Malibu on Interstate 95 in Richmond. Tucker was forced to undergo back surgery, and has not been able to return to work as an estate settlement associate.
State Farm issued an insurance policy to Tucker’s wife, Jennifer Frazier, which included UM coverage (uninsured coverage), as well as policies for each of Frazier’s parents. They all live in the same household. State Farm refused coverage, despite the fact that the policy states it provides UM coverage to resident relatives of the named insured, which includes people related by marriage.
Tucker’s attorney filed a lawsuit in response, asking for $350,000 in UM coverage for her injuries. Her lawyer stressed that the standard policy covers ‘marriage’ relations, and does not specify whether out not that marriage needs to be recognized by the state in which the insured lives, or the state where the accident happened.
We will keep you updated as the story unfolds.
Parrish Law Firm, PLLC car accident injury attorney works with Virginia residents who have been taken advantage of by insurance companies and are looking for fair compensation. Contact us today for a free case consultation, or call us at 703-906-4229.
A representative of Parrish Law Firm, PLLC researched and wrote this article with Mr. Parrish’s consent. If you have any questions regarding the legal implications of what you have just read, please send us your question by clicking here so we can have our attorney review it.