The Supreme Court remanded the following case back to the Court of Appeals to render a decision consistent with State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company v. Hodgkiss-Warrick, 413 S.W.3d 875 (2013).
For what it’s worth and as a little background, here is a small summary of Ward’s earlier holding that went up to SCOKY before going back down for a different ruling:
Ward v. Nationwide Assurance Co.
COA Not Published 9/13/2013
Underinsured Motorist Benefits Offset Not Enforceable
COA applied the public policy exception to the conflicts of law test and held the set- off provision contained in Ward’s insurance policy and authorized under Virginia law is contrary to Kentucky public policy. The UIM set-off provision would have resulted in reducing the available UIM coverage under the out of state policy by the amount of liability insurance available.
Insurance. Choice of Law. UIM (Underinsured motorist benefits). Affirming trial court’s application of Virginia law and policy regarding offset for liability insurance.
Ward vs. Nationwide Assurance Co.
COA NPO (non published opinion) 12/24/2014
Opinion Affirming; Jefferson County
ACREE, CHIEF JUDGE: This matter is before us on remand from the Kentucky Supreme Court to reconsider our previous opinion in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company v. Hodgkiss-Warrick, 413 S.W.3d 875 (2013). Upon further consideration, we conclude the public-policy exception to our traditional conflicts-of-law analysis offers no safe harbor to the appellant under the specific facts of this case and, therefore, the circuit court correctly determined that Virginia law governs this dispute.
For entire text of decision, continue reading below:
[gview file=”http://opinions.kycourts.net/coa/2012-CA-000809.pdf”]
