DocketNumber: No. CV99-0424611
Citation Numbers: 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 4864-z
Judges: THOMPSON, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 3/9/2000
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021
The apportionment defendant, Topeka Jemmott has now moved to strike the apportionment complaint filed by GEICO. Essentially, it is the claim of the defendant Jemmott that §
The defendant GEICO objects to the motion to strike claiming that an uninsured motorist action is unique because while it is based upon a contract between an insurer and its insured, the measure of recovery is governed by the liability for negligence of the alleged uninsured vehicle. Furthermore, the defendant GEICO claims that to disallow apportionment in such a case would result in a windfall to the plaintiffs since they would then be permitted to collect more from their uninsured motorist carrier than they would from the uninsured motorist had the latter carried adequate insurance. CT Page 4864-aa
The apportionment defendant Jemmott made the further claim at oral argument that an apportionment complaint is not necessary to address the windfall argument of GEICO since the liability of GEICO pursuant to its policy is limited to that which would be recoverable from the uninsured motorist, which liability would be only for such operator's proportionate share of negligence in accordance with §
It is the opinion of the court that by its very language §
THOMPSON, J.