The Michigan Supreme Court will hear a case that has been appealed by an insurance company. The previous case ruled that the insurer should pay money to a mother who witnessed her son’s death as he rode his motorcycle back from a wedding. The insurer doesn’t think it should have to pay this claim.
In 2007, a woman named Gale Boertmann was in a car behind her son, Chris Boertmann. He was driving a motorcycle. Another vehicle struck the motorcycle, and this accident resulted in the death of Chris Boertmann. Tragically, this means that Gale Boertmann witnessed the death of her son when this accident occurred.
It is very difficult to get over the death of a loved one. It has been said that the death of one’s child is especially hard to cope with. I cannot imagine how devastating it must be to watch your child die in a sudden accident like this one.
Gale Boertmann suffered from nightmares, insomnia, nose bleeds, and severe headaches as a result of the accident that took her son’s life. She has accrued more than $30,000 in medical and counseling bills. Her extreme distress has caused her to have to give up her job as a manager of some pizza restaurants.
She filed a claim to Cincinnati Insurance Co., the insurer that she has a car insurance policy with. She felt that she was entitled to insurance benefits because of the accident that occurred, (for lost wages and other expenses). Cincinnati Insurance Co. disagreed. This lead to a court case, and a decision in favor of Gale Boertmann.
Cincinnati Insurance Co. filed an appeal of that case. The Michigan Supreme Court is going to hear the case and make a decision on it soon. The court is currently inviting briefs from groups who are interested in this case, (including Michigan insurance regulators, lawyers who sue insurers, and attorneys who defend insurers).
A Michigan law states that “injuries need not result from physical contact with a motor vehicle”. It can be argued that Gale Boertmann was injured, even though she was not in the vehicle, or on the motorcycle, that was directly involved in the accident.
A lawyer for Cincinnati Insurance Co., Robert Hurley, notes that the crash was a “terrible tragedy”, but doesn’t believe that Gale Borertmann should be allowed to collect money from the insurer. He said:
“You have to have an accidental bodily injury that arises out of the use of an automobile – as an automobile… She would have suffered the exact same injury if she were standing on the front porch of her house”.
The implication being made here is that it is not important where, exactly, Gale Boertmann was at when she witnessed the death of her son. She happened to be in her car. This, according to the lawyer for the insurer, doesn’t mean that her car insurance company has to pay out a claim.
Image by Brian Turner on Flickr