Have you ever looked at that GEICO gecko and thought of unbridled passion and STIs? You would have if you’ve been following this story. Last year, a woman from Missouri was awarded $5.2 million dollars for contracting HPV in a company-insured vehicle. The legal aftermath of that award has been nothing less than titillating. If you liked, “well, that depends on what your definition of is is” you’ll love, “just because you’re using a vehicle doesn’t mean you’re using a vehicle.” From ABA Journal:
A federal judge in the Western District of Missouri has ruled for GEICO in a lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment that its auto policy doesn’t cover damages for a sexually transmitted disease contracted during car sex.
U.S. District Judge Fernando J. Gaitan Jr. ruled in a March 10 opinion that car sex doesn’t constitute “use” of the vehicle as required by GEICO’s insurance policy.
I’d like to take a moment of silence for anybody reading this whose student loan forgiveness plan largely centered around contracting HPV in an insured car. Given this economy, I assume that includes several of us. Beyond the deserved tee-heeing that the fact pattern deserves, the outcome of this case centers on an otherwise vague question — what constitutes a bodily injury?
[E-BOOK] 5 AI Productivity Hacks To Save Time And Streamline Your Law Firm
Discover five practical ways to harness AI and eliminate busywork—so you can focus more on your clients and less on repetitive tasks.
The policy language at issue in the federal litigation reads:
“Under Section I, we will pay damages which an insured becomes legally obligated to pay because of:
1. Bodily injury, sustained by a person, and:
2. Damage to or destruction of property, arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the owned auto or a nonowned auto.”
Brauner and M.O. had contended that the language about use of the auto only applies to property damage claims—not to bodily injury claims. They noted that the policy has since been modified by paragraph spacing so that it reads:
“Under Section I, we will pay damages which an insured becomes legally obligated to pay because of:
1. Bodily injury, sustained by a person, and:
2. Damage to or destruction of property,
arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of the owned auto or a nonowned auto.”
Gaitan, an appointee of former President George H.W. Bush, rejected the argument by Brauner and M.O.
Other policy provisions “do not support the idea that the policy is a general liability policy covering all bodily injuries caused by an insured, regardless of their connection with an automobile,” Gaitan said.
I think this reading of the policy makes sense. I do not think it would be realistic for someone to sue under the policy for bumping their hip into the car door to close it, so why should bumping uglies be the exception?
In the meantime, let’s all brainstorm on some other get rich quick schemes. Maybe amass some venture capital and wait for the eventual government bailout? If it is good enough for Silicon Valley bros, it is good enough for me.
STD Contracted During Car Sex Isn’t Covered By GEICO Auto Policy, Federal Judge Rules [ABA Journal]
Decrypting Crypto, Digital Assets, And Web3
"Decrypting Crypto" is a go-to guide for understanding the technology and tools underlying Web3 and issues raised in the context of specific legal practice areas.
Earlier: How Car Sex Made A Multimillionaire
GEICO Could Save 15% Or More On Their HPV Suit After This Remand
Chris Williams became a social media manager and assistant editor for Above the Law in June 2021. Prior to joining the staff, he moonlighted as a minor Memelord™ in the Facebook group Law School Memes for Edgy T14s. He endured Missouri long enough to graduate from Washington University in St. Louis School of Law. He is a former boatbuilder who cannot swim, a published author on critical race theory, philosophy, and humor, and has a love for cycling that occasionally annoys his peers. You can reach him by email at [email protected] and by tweet at @WritesForRent.