Articles

A Forklift is a Motor Vehicle Under Louisiana’s UM Statute

Case:
Boyett v. Redland Ins. Co.
Federal Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals (Louisiana law)
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 1658 (5th Cir. Jan. 27, 2014)

Plaintiff, Clyde Boyett, was employed as a truck driver by Boeuf River Ventures. Boyett was hauling lumber on a flatbed tractor-trailer for delivery to Carolina Lumber. Boeuf River maintained insurance on the truck under a commercial auto liability policy issued by Redland. The policy, issued in Louisiana, did not include any provisions relating to uninsured motorist (UM) coverage, but importantly, Boeuf River had not executed a waiver of UM coverage. Under Louisiana law, UM coverage is written into all automobile liability policies in an amount that is not less that the bodily injury liability limits provided by the policy, unless the insured has expressly rejected all coverage or selected lower limits. It was undisputed that Boyett was an insured under the Redland policy.

The accident occurred in North Carolina when an employee of Carolina Lumber, using a forklift to unload the lumber from the Boeuf River truck, struck and severely injured Boyett. Boyett and his wife sued Redland in Louisiana, alleging that the forklift was an uninsured motor vehicle and they were entitled to statutory UM benefits under Redland’s policy. Redland denied coverage, maintaining (1) the policy did not provide coverage for the North Carolina accident and (2) the forklift was not an uninsured motor vehicle under the Louisiana UM statute.

The federal Fifth Circuit first determined the legislative history of Louisiana’s UM statute dictated an intent to cover Louisiana residents under Louisiana-issued policies regardless of the location of the accident. The Court then turned to whether the forklift causing the accident was a “motor vehicle” within the meaning of the UM statute. The panel noted the absence of a definition of “motor vehicle” within the statute and the lack of any ruling by the Louisiana Supreme Court. The Court thus applied a dictionary meaning, concluding because a forklift was (1) a vehicle and (2) propelled by its own motor, the forklift was a motor vehicle under the UM statute. UM coverage was thus available to Boyett under the policy issued by Redland.

The dissenting Judge argued that a forklift was a vehicle not designed for highway use or required to be registered and was, thus, not subject to the compulsory liability insurance requirement under Louisiana law. Time will tell if the Boyett decision will be used to also expand the scope of coverage under commercial auto liability policies, which exclude losses arising from mobile equipment like forklifts. The Fifth Circuit’s opinion in Boyett is based in part on Louisiana’s public policy of liberally construing the UM statute in favor of coverage, perhaps restricting its applicability to UM cases and not when the third party liability provisions of an auto liability policy are at issue.

Related Practices


Related Attorneys

Find an Attorney

Each of the firm's offices include partners, associates and a professional staff dedicated to meeting the challenge of providing the firm's clients with extraordinary service.