Saturday, June 09, 2007

Parents could not make property damage claim for adult child's personal automobile because they did not have an insurable interest in the vehicle. Sayah v. Metropolitan prop. & casualty Insurance . 745 Cite as 273 Neb. 744 Someone stole son Saif's 1999 Grand Cherokee and the police found it burned, on cinder blocks with its decorative mag wheels missing. Son and parents all sued for property damage. Initially the insurance company denied the claim because it was suspicious. District court gave insurance company summary judgment because the son did not have insurance and the parents had no insurable interest. See 44-375 RRS Neb. Supreme Court affirms. a claimant under an insurance contract must show an interest in the contract that would be recognized and protected by the courts. An insurable interest is “every interest in property or any relation thereto, or liability in respect thereof, of such a nature that a contemplated peril might directly damnify the insured.” [7-10] Section 44-375 provides: “[w]hen the name of the party intended to be insured is specified in a policy, such insurance can be applied only to his own proper interest.” Under Nebraska law, to have an insurable interest, the claimant must have some legally enforceable right that would be recognized and enforced in the property at issue. Neither family use of property nor the family relationship alone gives automatic rise to an insurable property interest. A parent has no legal recourse in an adult child’s property simply by being a parent, without some other legally enforceable right. Nor does Nebraska law recognize Ali’s occasional use of Saif’s Jeep as a legal interest. When no legally enforceable interest exists, no insurable interest exists.

No comments: