Cann v. King County
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the CourtColeman, J.
The Washington state underinsured motorist statute mandates underinsured motorist coverage on all motor vehicle liability policies. RCW 48.22.030(2). Betty Lou Cann argues that as a self-insurer, King County has a liability policy and therefore must provide underinsured motorist coverage for its passengers. The Washington State Supreme Court has held that self-insurance is not a liability policy under the UIM statute. See Kyrkos v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 121 Wn.2d 669, 674, 852 P.2d 1078 (1993); RCW 48.22.030(1). Consequently, we hold that the County, as a self-insurer, has no…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. BrightWashington Supreme Court · 1996
- State v. BrightWashington Supreme Court · 1996
- Quinn Kyrkos v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1993
- Van Vonno v. Hertz CorporationWashington Supreme Court · 1992
- Corley v. Hertz Corp.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- New Hampshire Indem v. Budget Rent-A-CarCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2001
- New Hampshire Indemnity Co. v. Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2001
- Diaz v. National Car Rental Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals of Washington · 1999
- Cann v. King CountyCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997