State Farm v. Windham

SCCTAPPAugust 5, 2020No. 2016-002185

Plaintiff WinState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Case Details

Status: Published
Procedural Posture: appeal of summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Court reversed summary judgment granted to State Farm, holding that Windham could stack her underinsured motorist coverage from her policies when injured in a rental car accident.

Excerpt

Myra M. Windham appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company on its declaratory judgment action. State Farm sought a determination that Windham could not stack her underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage from her policies with it when she was in an automobile accident while driving a rental car. We reverse.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** Myra Windham was injured in a car accident while driving a rental car. She had multiple insurance policies with State Farm that included underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage, which protects drivers when they're hit by someone without enough insurance to cover their injuries. Windham wanted to "stack" or combine the coverage amounts from her different policies to get more money for her injuries. State Farm said no, arguing she couldn't stack coverage from multiple policies for a rental car accident, and asked the court to rule in their favor. **What the Court Decided:** The court sided with Windham. It overturned a lower court's decision that had favored State Farm, ruling that Windham was allowed to stack her underinsured motorist coverage from her multiple policies, even though the accident happened in a rental car. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling is important for anyone with multiple insurance policies. It confirms that policyholders may be able to combine coverage amounts from different policies when they're injured by an underinsured driver, potentially providing more financial protection. Workers should review their insurance policies to understand their coverage options, especially if they frequently drive rental cars for work or personal use.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Christine Tedder v. Harris Teeter, Employer

SCCTAPPApr 2026

Plaintiff Win

Jada Garris v. Lexington School District One

SCCTAPPJul 2022

Plaintiff Win

Barr v. Darlington County School District

SCCTAPPApr 2021

Kenneth L. Barr, Employee, appeals the decision of the Appellate Panel of the Workers' Compensation Commission denying his claim for medical and compensation benefits. Employee asserts injury as a result of exposure to volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the paints he used while working as a painter for the Darlington County School District. We affirm the decision of the Commission.

Defendant Win

Read Full Opinion More State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check Your Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.