Jones

Jones v. IDS Prop. Cas. Ins. Co.

Good Law
238 Cal. Rptr. 3d 356·27 Cal. App. 5th 625
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 25, 2018C084065California6,079 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Duarte, J.

*358 *628 When a wife sues for loss of consortium after her husband is seriously injured in an automobile accident that is the defendant's fault, is her claim subject to the same per person limit of the defendant's insurance policy as her husband's claim for bodily injury? That is the issue presented in this case. All California cases except one have answered the question in the affirmative, finding the language of the policy was sufficient to aggregate the two claims. Here, the policy language reads: "The bodily injury liability limits for each person is the maximum we will pay as damages for bodily injury, including damages for care and loss of service, to one person per occurrence." Although the policy language at issue here differs slightly from the language in the published cases, we find it is sufficient to aggregate the two claims.

As we explain, the language makes clear that the damages for bodily injury include loss of consortium. Further, the policy language provides that so long as only one person suffered bodily injury, the per person limit applies. Although the plaintiffs here argue that the language "to one person" modifies "the maximum we will pay" rather than…

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.