It’s always a good idea to take a refresher course on the Class I and Class II distinctions for Uninsured Motorist Coverage. As far back as 1971, the Florida Supreme Court divided the class
of insureds who are entitled to seek Uninsured Motorist coverage under a Florida auto policy.

In Mullis v. State Farm, 252 So.2d 229 (Fla. 1971), the Supreme Court gave named insured and resident relatives of their household the distinction of a “Class I Insured” and other permissive drivers or occupants of the insured auto, who were not named insureds or resident relatives, the distinctions of a “Class II Insured.” The importance of this distinction arises when a claimant seeks stacked UM under the policy. As a Class I Insured, the claimant is entitled to the stacked UM coverage purchased on the policy of insurance; a Class II insured has no opportunity for stacked UM even if stacked UM was purchased and paid for by the named insured. It simply does not apply to a Class II insured. The rationale was set forth in Florida Farm Bureau v. Hurtado, 587 So.2d 1314 (Fla. 1991), wherein the Supreme Court confirmed that Class I Insureds are covered regardless of their location when they are injured by an uninsured motorist; on the other hand, coverage for a Class II Insured is limited to occupancy of a particular insured auto, therefore limiting recovery to the UM coverage available for that particular vehicle.

Guidance for Insurers

It is necessary for insurers to determine whether the claimant is a named insured or a resident relative of that household or merely an occupant of an insured auto; that distinction determines
the insurer’s exposure for stacked UM coverage.