Ferellec v. Government Employees Insurance, No. Cv99-0424611 (Mar. 9, 2000)

**Court Ruling Summary: Ferellec v. Government Employees Insurance** This case involved a dispute between Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO) and another defendant named Jemmott regarding how to divide responsibility for damages in an uninsured motorist claim. GEICO wanted the court to use Connecticut's apportionment law to split liability between multiple parties, but Jemmott challenged this approach. The court sided with Jemmott on a key legal issue. The judge ruled that uninsured motorist claims are based on insurance contract terms, not negligence law. Because Connecticut's apportionment statute only applies to negligence cases, GEICO could not use it to divide responsibility in this type of insurance dispute. The court struck down GEICO's attempt to use the apportionment law, though it left the question of GEICO's overall liability to be decided at trial. **What This Means for Workers:** While this case primarily deals with insurance law rather than employment issues directly, it shows how courts carefully interpret when specific laws apply. For workers dealing with insurance claims related to work injuries or benefits, this ruling demonstrates that insurance disputes follow contract law rules, which may offer different protections than negligence-based claims.