Any UIM coverage in a corporate liability policy does not extend to, and is not required for, an executive riding a personally owned vehicle, not in the course of business.

Mayhew v. Alterra Excess and Surplus Insurance Co., Case No. 2:11-cv-190 (D. Vt., January 25, 2012)

In this dispute over insurance coverage, the parties  have cross-moved for summary judgment. At issue is whether Alterra must provide Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage to Mayhew as president of Mayhew Enterprises, Inc., under a policy issued to the corporation,  for injuries Mayhew sustained in an auto accident. For the reasons stated below, the Court holds that Mayhew is not a covered individual under the issued insurance policy. Additionally, because the Vermont Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Statute, Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 941, only applies to those insured under the policy in question, Alterra is not required to provide UM/UIM coverage to Mayhew.

The definition of an insured provided in the policy is unambiguous. The Mayhew Enterprises, Inc. policy specified that the policy excluded "any partner or executive officer with respect to any auto owned by such partner or officer or a member of her household." This exclusion, which eliminates coverage not only for family members of executives using private vehicles, but also the executive officers themselves, unambiguously excludes executive officers who are using their own vehicles not on company business. Based upon the plain meaning of the definition of an insured in the Endorsement, Mayhew is excluded from coverage under part as he was an executive officer riding his motorcycle, a personally owned vehicle, not in the course of business.

While UM/UIM is statutorily mandated and insurance provisions cannot reduce or eliminate UM/UIM coverage, "those protections extend only to those insured under the policy. " Norman v. King, 659 A.2d 1123, 1125 (1995). Thus, if a "plaintiff cannot show that she meets any of the definitions of `an insured' under the UIM section of the policy . . . by its terms the policy excludes plaintiff from UIM coverage." Canedy v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 126 F.3d 100, 104 (2d Cir. 1997) (construing Vt. law).

Because Mayhew is not an insured under the Endorsement, Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 23, § 941 does not compel Alterra to provide UM/UIM coverage to him under the CGL.