Wallace v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

[¶ 16] I respectfully dissent because the plain language of Maine’s UM statute, and our jurisprudence interpreting it, require that the plaintiffs be afforded the same recovery that they would have been entitled to had the Twin Pines vehicle been insured to the same extent as Wallace’s UM coverage.

[¶ 17] The automobile accident at the heart, of this case produced disastrous consequences. The plaintiffs, Wallace and.Fol-ce, allege in their pleadings that, as a result of the accident, they both suffered brain injuries and numerous lacerations. In addition, Wallace. alleges to have suffered a…