by Paul A. Lauto, Esq.
In 2021, a Missouri woman filed an arbitration claim against Geico for damages sustained from an STD received in a Geico insured vehicle. Reportedly, the woman had sex with a man in his vehicle that was insured by Geico. It was claimed that the man failed to disclose to the woman that he had an STD before having relations and that as a result, she contracted the STD for which the Geico policy should cover. Geico refused a 1 Million Dollar settlement demand and would not provide a defense or counsel for their insured, claiming that the damages were not sustained during the normal use of the vehicle. Subsequently upon conclusion of the Arbitration, the woman was awarded 5.2 Million Dollars.
Geico appealed the decision with the Court of Appeals and lost. The Court of Appeals reasoned that liability and damages had already been decided and since Geico chose not to defend their insured, they had no right to re-litigate those issues. Geico then recently appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which essentially reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals stating that Geico should have previously had a chance to present a defense. Accordingly, the Supreme Court returned the case to the lower court for "further discussion."
As absurd as this case may seem, the fact remains that Geico not only had an opportunity to settle this claim prior to litigation but also had the chance to have their attorneys defend against the case. Notwithstanding, Geico defiantly refused to do either and effectively waived their right to a defense. Instead of giving Geico a third chance to avoid liability, perhaps the Supreme Court should have just dismissed the case outright for being frivolous in nature.
Long Island Attorney
Paul A. Lauto, Esq.
www.liattorney.com"At the time of
In 2021, a Missouri woman filed an arbitration claim against Geico for damages sustained from an STD received in a Geico insured vehicle. Reportedly, the woman had sex with a man in his vehicle that was insured by Geico. It was claimed that the man failed to disclose to the woman that he had an STD before having relations and that as a result, she contracted the STD for which the Geico policy should cover. Geico refused a 1 Million Dollar settlement demand and would not provide a defense or counsel for their insured, claiming that the damages were not sustained during the normal use of the vehicle. Subsequently upon conclusion of the Arbitration, the woman was awarded 5.2 Million Dollars.
Geico appealed the decision with the Court of Appeals and lost. The Court of Appeals reasoned that liability and damages had already been decided and since Geico chose not to defend their insured, they had no right to re-litigate those issues. Geico then recently appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court, which essentially reversed the decision of the Court of Appeals stating that Geico should have previously had a chance to present a defense. Accordingly, the Supreme Court returned the case to the lower court for "further discussion."
As absurd as this case may seem, the fact remains that Geico not only had an opportunity to settle this claim prior to litigation but also had the chance to have their attorneys defend against the case. Notwithstanding, Geico defiantly refused to do either and effectively waived their right to a defense. Instead of giving Geico a third chance to avoid liability, perhaps the Supreme Court should have just dismissed the case outright for being frivolous in nature.
Long Island Attorney
Paul A. Lauto, Esq.
www.liattorney.com"At the time of
RSS Feed
