|
|
| |
| Sat, Oct. 11, 2008 |  |
 |
|
||
| |
Insurer not required to cover wayward Fayetteville driver's wreck, court rules Friday, Apr 25, 2008 Arkansas News Bureau LITTLE ROCK - An insurance company is not obligated to cover the vehicle of a client who intentionally rammed her car into another, the state Supreme Court Arkansas Supreme Court ruled Thursday. The high court affirmed a decision by Washington County Circuit Judge Mark Lindsay ruling, who earlier ruled an exclusionary clause in Diana McSparrin's vehicle insurance policy applied and the company did not have to defend or indemnify her. About 3 a.m. on July 19, 2006, McSparrin repeatedly rammed her car into a vehicle owned by Joshua Dark, which was parked outside his Fayetteville home, the court record said. The successive impacts pushed Dark's vehicle about 50 feet until it stopped against a vehicle belonging to McSparrin's ex-boyfriend, Thomas Dennis, who lived next door. Fayetteville police were called to the scene and McSparrin was charged with driving while intoxicated after she failed a sobriety test. She was later convicted of DWI. Separately, McSparrin's insurer, Direct Insurance, filed an action for a declaratory judgment in Washington County Circuit Court, arguing that because McSparrin had intentionally driven her vehicle into Dark's vehicle, the insurance company did not have a duty to defend or indemnify her under an exclusionary clause in her policy. The clause says Direct does "not provide liability coverage for any covered person who intentionally causes bodily injury or property damage." At a hearing, McSparrin acknowledged she had been drinking at Dennis' home but said she did not recall ramming her vehicle into Dark's vehicle because she was intoxicated at the time. Circuit Judge Mark Lindsay ruled in favor of the insurance company. In her appeal, McSparrin argued Lindsay erred because she could not have intentionally rammed Dark's vehicle because she was voluntarily intoxicated. In a unanimous ruling, the high court said the evidence indicated otherwise. "Weighting against her," the court said, "is the fact that she rammed Dark's vehicle until it rested against that of her ex-boyfriend - who she was upset with, that she giggled as she repeatedly backed up and rammed Dark's vehicle, and the fact that her intoxication was at least not so severe that she was cognizant of the fact that Dark's father had called the police to report her act and (she) called him an 'a------' for doing so before her arrest." Also, the court noted that after her arrest, McSparrin made a recorded statement for her insurance company admitting her damage to Dark's vehicle was intentional. |
