Messick v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE E. SCOTT BRADLEY 1 The Circle, Suite 2 GEORG ETOW N, DE 19947 JUDGE November 5, 2012 H. Clay Davis III, Esquire Henry Clay Davis, III, P.A. 303 N. Bedford Street P.O. Box 744 Georgetown, DE 19947 RE: Jeffrey A. Young, Esquire Young & McNelis 300 South State Street Dover, DE 19901 Jessica Messick v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company C.A. No. 11C-11-019 Dear Counsel: This is my decision on the Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment in this motor vehicle accident case where the Plaintiff is seeking insurance coverage from Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. After further briefing on the matter, the Plaintiff has conceded that the Personal Injury Protection statute1 does not provide the coverage she seeks. The Uninsured Motorist statute2 limits coverage to the insured and those others legally entitled to it. It does not provide for any more coverage than what is provided for in the State Farm insurance policy in question. State Farms s insurance policy with Kathy R. Lawson, who is the Plaintiff s boyfriend s mother, limits coverage under the uninsured portion to the insured, a resident relative, and any other person while occupying the insured s car, a newly acquired car, or a temporary substitute car. The Plaintiff concedes that she does not fall within any of those categories. Therefore, I have denied the Plaintiff s Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed her complaint with prejudice. 1 21 Del.C. § 2118. 2 18 Del.C. § 3902. 1 IT IS SO ORDERED. Very truly yours, /s/ E. Scott Bradley E. Scott Bradley 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
