-----------------------------------------------
Posted on 06/08/2022 6:36:53 AM PDT by grundle
The Missouri Court of Appeals has affirmed that an insurance company must pay a $5.2 million settlement granted to a Jackson County woman who claimed she unwittingly caught a sexually transmitted disease from her former romantic partner in his car.
In an opinion issued Tuesday, a three-judge panel found that the judgment entered against GEICO General Insurance Company through earlier arbitration proceedings was valid. The insurance companies sought to undo the action, claiming errors were made in Jackson County Circuit Court and the settlement agreement was not done in line with Missouri law.
According to court papers, the woman, identified in court records only as M.O., notified GEICO in February 2021 of her intention to seek monetary damages, alleging she contracted HPV, the human papillomavirus, from an insured member in his automobile. She contended the man caused her to be infected with the STD despite being aware of his condition and the risks of unprotected sex.
The insurance company declined the settlement, sending the case to arbitration.
In May 2021, the arbitrator found that the man and woman had sex inside his vehicle that “directly caused, or directly contributed to cause” the HPV infection. The man was found liable for not disclosing his infection status and the woman was awarded $5.2 million for damages and injuries to be paid by GEICO.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Some earlier details leading up to this panel ruling would be interesting.
How did this woman dream up this crazy scheme in the first place? What happened in the arbitration? What in the world was being arbitrated? How can she claim to have "unwittingly" contracted the STD when she had voluntary unprotected sex? How in the world did she snare the INSURANCE company in this?
Can any person who "unwittingly" contracts an STD go after the other person's insurance company? Why restrict it to auto insurance? Go after the homeowner and health insurance companies! You are more likely to "unwittingly" contract an STD in a house than in a car. Or go after the hotel's casualty insurer.
Probably
I suppose mattress makers will be next.
I’m sorry, but inquiring what minds want to know was she rear ended?
Silly me. I thought car insurance was about damage and liability from operating the vehicle. I didn’t know it covered everything that a stupid car owner did in his vehicle.
You asking for a friend? ;)
Or maybe just not knowingly pass on your STD to someone else without warning.
MMM, maybe
Unbelievably insane.
This needs to be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. The unintended consequences, as noted by several posters, are unimaginable.
Interesting… stupid ruling on its face but it depends on the wording of the contract.
If the boyfriend had liability insurance for damages caused “while in use of vehicle” as opposed to “operating the vehicle” I could see some stupid judge ruling on that. (Or at least a community college “educated” arbitrator)
I’d have thrown the whole thing out - but then I’m not a Democrat who believes there are 31 gender flavors.
Did she get an STD from the lizard?
The article said she knew he ws Infected
“She contended the man caused her to be infected with the STD despite being aware of his condition and the risks of unprotected sex. “
Ta hoe?
[[She contended the man caused her to be infected with the STD despite being aware of his condition and the risks of unprotected sex. ]]
Quite a racket- know you are gonna be Injured or Infected, do the thing anyways, and become a millionaire as a result.
I thunk I’ll twist my ankle playing twister-
That is referring to the man being aware of his condition. Otherwise there would be no basis to the suit.
It appears that Geico sent this case to arbitration, the arbitrator found them liable and awarded damages, and the Missouri Court of Appeals is simply telling Geico that these were the terms they chose, and they can’t back out if they don’t like the results. The arbitrator is the stupid one here. I could be wrong, that’s just the way I read it.
The article states that she knew of his disease and knew the risk and had sex anyways. Who’s to say she contracted it that day, in that car? She likely had been sexually active a.ready, unless she is claiming it ws her one and only time? How the heck did they find in her favor?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.