As recently reported in the Virginia Lawyers’ Weekly, the Insurance Recovery Law Group, PLC (along with co-counsel CantorArkema) prevailed on summary judgment argument in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, securing a ruling in Jefferson v. Harco National Ins. Co. that Harco National owed the firm’s client an additional $100,000 in underinsured motorist coverage for an accident that left him severely injured.
John Rasmussen of the firm and Elliott Buckner of CantorArkema briefed the case, and John argued it. Harco had claimed its UM coverage was contingent and did not apply because the insured had other UM coverage available from other policies. The Court rejected that position, and instead adopted the firm’s position that UM carriers in Virginia cannot provide contingent coverage. All available UM coverage stacks. And any contrary policy terms are void because they contradict Virginia’s UM statute, Virginia Code section 38.2-2206. In reaching that result, the federal court relied in part on a Virginia Supreme Court opinion secured by the firm earlier this year in Seals v. Erie Insurance Exchange, 277 Va. 558, 674 S.E.2d 860 (2009).