When an insurer pays a benefit under a policy provision for underinsured motorist coverage or uninsured motorist coverage, it is in effect paying a debt owed by the underinsured or uninsured driver, the person who is actually liable for the damages arising as a result of the event that led to the insurer having to make the payment. An insurer who makes such payments has a right, the right of subrogation, by which it is permitted to take legal action against the underinsured or uninsured motorist in an attempt to recover as much as possible of the amount the insurer has paid out. The insurer's subrogation right will only have value, as a practical matter, to the extent that the underinsured or uninsured driver has assets that can be seized by legal process to satisfy the judgment that the insurer obtains against the underinsured or uninsured driver in its subrogation action.
The essential things that have to be proved by a plaintiff in a products liability action against the manufacturer or seller of a car or truck are that the vehicle contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk of danger when the vehicle was used for its intended purpose and that the alleged defect caused the occurrence of a collision or similar incident, for example a vehicle fire, that resulted in the death, personal injury, or property damage for which the plaintiff seeks to recover damages. Such alleged defects in a vehicle may include shortcomings in its design, errors in the manufacturing of its numerous parts and their assembly into a complete car or truck, or failure to properly warn the purchaser or user of some danger inherent in the operation and use of the vehicle.
Under an insurance policy, an insurance company has two principal obligations. One of those obligations is the insurance company's duty to indemnify the insured in the event of a claim within the policy's coverage. The insurance company's duty to indemnify is usually triggered when the insured's legal obligation to pay damages is established either through a court judgment or a settlement. The duty to indemnify depends on facts and not speculation. This makes the duty to indemnify narrower in scope than an insurance company's duty to defend an insured.
No-fault insurance coverage essentially provides a less expansive insurance coverage than that of the traditional system, limiting the right of parties to bring traditional fault-based legal actions and the availability of certain types of damages that cannot be directly measured in economic terms, such as damages for what the law terms "pain and suffering," which often make up the bulk of the damages awarded in a traditional court action. In return, the no-fault system attempts to indemnify persons who have suffered personal injury or property damage in an auto accident more quickly and efficiently than can be accomplished by traditional methods, and also to reduce costs for all the participants in the insurance system. No-fault insurance laws often contain exceptions to their limitations on coverage and allow the bringing of traditional court actions in cases where serious injuries are involved.
Insurance companies can limit liability in automobile insurance policies by setting a per person limitation on the amount of benefits that will be paid under the policy for bodily injury to or the death of one person per accident. Whether the limitation is stated as person or each person makes no difference. Such limitations on liability are necessary. Without them, an insurance company could be at risk for more than the funds that it has to pay its claims. The insured pays a certain amount, called a premium, based in part upon the policy limits.
