State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Yancy

----ooOoo---- Amy (Echard) Otto,
Plaintiff,

v.

Thor Y. Wixom and State Farm
Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
Defendants.
______________________________
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
Cross-plaintiff,

v.

Thor Y. Wixom,
Cross-defendant.
______________________________
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
Third-party Plaintiff,

v.

Laura Yancey,
Third-party Defendant.
______________________________
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company,
Third-party Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

Metropolitan Property & Casualty Liability Company,
Third-party Defendant and Appellant. )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) MEMORANDUM DECISION
(Not For Official Publication)

Case No. 971584-CA

F I L E D
(December 17, 1998)

-----

Second District, Ogden Department
The Honorable Michael Glasmann

Attorneys:
J. Rand Hirschi, Clinton D. Jensen, and Carlton R. Ericson, Salt Lake City, for Appellant
Lowell V. Smith and Eric K. Davenport, Salt Lake City, for Appellee

-----
 

Before Judges Davis, Bench, and Jackson.

BENCH, Judge:

The trial court granted State Farm's Motion for Summary Judgment and determined "that the subject Metropolitan policy provides coverage for Thor Wixom as it relates to this matter." We agree.

Utah Code Ann. § 31A-22-303(1) (1994) states that a policy of motor vehicle liability coverage . . . shall: . . . .

(c) . . . insure persons related to the named insured by blood, marriage, adoption, or guardianship who are residents of the named insured's household, including those who usually make their home in the same household but temporarily live elsewhere, to the same extent as the named insured. The undisputed facts show that Thor Wixom is related by blood to the named insured (the father) and lived in the household of the father at the time of the accident. Thus, if the father would be covered while driving the non-owned vehicle, the coverage must extend to Thor Wixom to "the same extent as" the father. Id. Here, Metropolitan conceded that had the father driven the non-owned vehicle, the Metropolitan policy would have covered the father. We therefore hold, as a matter of law, that Metropolitan's policy provides the same coverage for Thor Wixom.

"We have reviewed the other arguments made on appeal and find them to be without merit or unnecessary to this decision."
F.H. v. State, 965 P.2d 590, 592 (Utah Ct. App. 1998).

Affirmed.
 

____________________________
Russell W. Bench, Judge
 

-----
 

WE CONCUR:
 

____________________________
James Z. Davis, Presiding Judge
 

____________________________
Norman H. Jackson, Judge