Valerie Dondero, of the Miami office, obtained a Summary Judgment in favor of the Insurer on a denial of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage.

The Plaintiff claimed entitlement to uninsured/underinsured coverage under a commercial auto policy issued to her husband’s corporation. The Plaintiff first alleged that she was entitled to uninsured/underinsured coverage because the Insurer failed to advise her of her right to purchase matching uninsured/underinsured when she increased the bodily injury coverage. Plaintiff then argued that a refrigerated box truck insured on the policy had broken down on the side of the road, and Plaintiff was required to travel from Palm Beach to Miami to rent a substitute box truck. On the way back to Palm Beach, she was involved in an accident. The Plaintiff was driving her personally owned vehicle which was not insured on the policy. She attempted to claim that she was driving her vehicle as another temporary substitute vehicle for the broken down box truck and that Progressive’s UM insuring provisions were ambiguous. Cross Motions for Summary Judgment were filed and the court determined that the Plaintiff was not an “insured” under the commercial auto policy because she was not occupying an insured auto or a temporary substitute auto at the time of the accident. The court further found that even if the personally owned vehicle was considered a substitute for the disabled box truck, it still did not fall within the definition of “temporary substitute auto” because the personally owned vehicle was owned by an employee of the Corporation and also available for the regular use of the Plaintiff; two exclusions contained within the policy.