410_C061


HUSBAND ACTS ON WIFE'S BEHALF IN REJECTING HIGHER UM LIMITS


Richard Messerly applied to State Farm's agent, Jerry Marcacci, for auto liability coverage. Richard met with the agent at his office to discuss the coverage wanted, but his wife Rhonda did not accompany him. The agent customarily spent about 30-45 minutes with prospects discussing the various types and terms available, including UM coverage. He followed this procedure with Richard. The evidence showed that Richard told the agent he wanted the lowest amounts of UM coverage possible. He signed two forms for the two cars belonging to the family, each stating that he had been offered, but chose to reject, additional UM coverage and chose limits of $20,000/$40,000. This was the UM coverage in force in October 1992.

At that time, Rhonda was injured in an accident with an uninsured motorist, and her medical expenses exceeded $50,000.

She filed this action for declaratory judgment on the grounds that the company had not complied with the statute inasmuch as she had not been offered additional UM coverage. She sought to have the policy reformed to show UM coverage equal to the limits of their policy.

The trial court ruled in her favor, stating that the company was required to offer additional UM coverage to each named insured. The court reformed the policy to provide $50,000 UM coverage which was an amount equal to the bodily injury liability coverage.

The company appealed, and the higher court disagreed with the trial court.

The court pointed out that the statute had been amended after the Messerly policy was issued and now required the company to offer such coverage to the applicant.

In reversing the judgment, the higher court said that Rhonda had relied upon her husband to make decisions for her in securing the insurance and, therefore, should be bound by his decision. The rejection of additional UM coverage by Richard bound all insureds under the policy.

Rhonda Messerly v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellant--No. 4-95- 0351--Appellate Court of Illinois, Fourth District--February 23, 1996--662 North Eastern Reporter 2d 148.