Peebles v. Owners Ins. Co.

**Peebles v. Owners Insurance Co. (Ohio, 2002)** This case involved a dispute over insurance coverage after a car accident. Peebles was apparently a household employee (like a housekeeper, nanny, or caretaker) who was injured in a motor vehicle accident. The question was whether Owners Insurance Company had to provide uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage under a homeowner's insurance policy. The insurance company likely argued they didn't have to pay because of a "residence-employee exception" - a rule that excludes coverage for certain household workers. The Ohio court dismissed the appeal "as improvidently allowed," which means they decided they shouldn't have agreed to hear the case in the first place. This dismissal doesn't resolve the underlying insurance coverage question - it simply ends the case without a decision on the merits. **What this means for workers:** Household employees like housekeepers, nannies, and caregivers should be aware that homeowner's insurance policies may not cover them if they're injured in car accidents while working. These "residence-employee exceptions" can leave domestic workers without important insurance protections. If you're a household employee, ask your employer about insurance coverage and consider getting your own auto insurance with uninsured/underinsured motorist protection.