A federal district court in California has ruled that death benefits were not payable to a widow who said that her husband had been struck after he exited a tow truck and it backed over him, reasoning that he had not been “in or on” the tow truck at the time of his death.

The Case

According to Donna Lamb, her husband Stephen Robert Lamb called a tow truck after his vehicle became disabled and he was riding in the tow truck when the driver pulled over to investigate a problem. Ms. Lamb asserted that her husband exited the tow truck, at which point the driver backed over him, causing his death.

Ms. Lamb sought benefits under a common carrier death benefit rider to a group accidental death insurance policy issued by Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company.

Transamerica denied coverage, Ms. Lamb sued, and Transamerica moved for judgment on the pleadings.

The Policy

The Transamerica policy’s common carrier death benefit rider stated that Transamerica:

will pay the benefit shown on the Schedule . . . subject to the following conditions: . . . (2) the accident causing the Injury must occur while riding as a fare paying passenger in or on a licensed public conveyance operated by a Common Carrier for the regular transport of passengers.

The District Court’s Decision

The district court granted Transamerica’s motion, finding that the policy’s “plain terms” precluded coverage.

In its decision, the district court agreed with Transamerica that there was no coverage because Mr. Lamb was not killed while riding as a fare paying passenger in or on a licensed public conveyance operated by a common carrier for the regular transport of passengers, as the policy required.

The district court pointed out that Ms. Lamb’s complaint “clearly” stated that Mr. Lamb had exited the tow truck before he was killed. The district court added that even assuming that the tow truck qualified as a common carrier, Mr. Lamb was not “in or on” the tow truck at the time of his death but had “gotten out of the vehicle.”

Accordingly, the district court concluded, under the policy’s plain terms, Transamerica was justified in denying benefits.

The case is Lamb v. Transamerica Premier Life Ins. Co., No. CV 18-3255 FMO (MRWx) (C.D. Cal. March 14, 2019). Attorneys involved include: For Donna Lamb, individually, Plaintiff: Lawrence Patrick Grassini, LEAD ATTORNEY, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA; Marshall James Shepardson, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA; Robert Brian Reagan, Jr, Roland Gregory Wrinkle, Grassini and Wrinkle, Woodland Hills, CA. For Transamerica Premier Life Insurance Company, formerly known as Monumental Life Insurance Company, Monumental Life Insurance Company, Defendants: Chakameh Ganji, Misty A Murray, Vivian I Orlando, Hinshaw and Culbertson LLP, Los Angeles, CA.