Progressive Gulf Insurance Com v. Christian Faehnrich

Good Law
627 F.3d 1137·2010 WL 4948507·2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 24891
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 7, 201009-16487California5,106 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Background

The parties stipulated to the relevant facts. Progressive Gulf Insurance Company issued an automobile insurance policy to Randall and Toni Faehnrich, who had two minor children. At the time of contracting, the Faehnrichs resided in Mississippi. The policy contained a Mississippi choice-of-law provision and set coverage limits for bodily injury of $100,000 per per- son and $300,000 per occurrence. The policy expressly did not cover family members’ bodily injuries.

The Faehnrichs divorced, and Toni Faehnrich moved from Mississippi to Nevada with the two children. Shortly thereaf- ter, while the policy remained in effect, Toni had a one-car accident in the insured vehicle. The accident occurred in Las Vegas, Nevada. The two minor children, who were riding in the car at the time of the accident, sustained bodily injuries.

Randall Faehnrich, as the children’s natural father and legal guardian, presented a claim to the insurer. The insurer denied coverage because of the family-member exclusion. Thereafter the insurer brought this diversity action seeking, among other things, an order declaring that the family-member exclusion is valid and enforceable in Nevada.

The…

lead Opinion

Graber, J.

Order; Dissent by Judge KLEINFELD.

ORDER

Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Nevada Rules of Appellate Procedure, we respectfully certify to the Supreme Court of Nevada the question of law set forth in Section III of this order. That question will determine an issue pending before this court. No precedent in the decisions of the Supreme Court of Nevada controls that issue.

I. Background

The parties stipulated to the relevant facts. Progressive Gulf Insurance Company issued an automobile insurance policy to Randall and Toni Faehnrich, who had two minor children. At the time of contracting, the Faehnrichs resided in Mississippi. The policy contained a Mississippi choice-of-law provision and set coverage limits for bodily injury of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. The policy expressly did not cover family members’ bodily injuries.

The Faehnrichs divorced, and Toni Faehnrich moved from Mississippi to Nevada with the two children. Shortly thereafter, while the policy remained in effect, Toni had a one-car accident in the insured vehicle. The accident occurred in Las Vegas, Nevada. The two minor children, who were riding in the car at the time of the accident, sustained…

dissent Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

I respectfully dissent from the order certifying this case to the Nevada Supreme Court. I do not think we need to burden the parties and the Nevada Supreme Court with an additional round of litigation, because this case is controlled by Sotirakis v. United Service Automobile Association. 1

The policy was issued to Mr. and Mrs. Faehnrich when they both lived in Mississippi. Progressive mailed the policy to the Faehnrichs’ address in Mississippi. The premiums charged were Mississippi-based, and the policy covered cars garaged in Mississippi. The policy provides that Mississippi law controls.

The only connection with Nevada is that after purchasing the policy in Mississippi, the Faehnrichs divorced and Mrs. Faehnrich moved to Nevada. Their children flew out to Nevada the day before Mrs. Faehnrich had her one-car accident. Under Sotirakis, that does not furnish a basis for applying Nevada law.

In Sotirakis, the Nevada Supreme Court held that California law applied to a California insurance contract containing a family exclusion clause between California parties. 2 There, Sotirakis, a California resident covered by a California insurance policy, got into a car accident in Nevada.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.