If the tortfeasor's liability exceeded his insurance coverage, then State Farm must pay the difference between the Staffords' underinsured motorist coverage limit and the amount received on behalf of the tortfeasor. State Farm frames the issue as whether the district court properly interpreted the language of the Staffords' insurance policy. The district court did not provide any interpretation of the policy language. It merely granted the Staffords' motion for summary judgment and ordered State Farm to pay them without providing any reasoning for its decision. Thus, the question is whether the district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the Staffords.
Summary judgment is proper when only questions of law are presented.
American Home Life Ins. 22 Kan. App. In this case, the only question involves the interpretation of K.S.A. 40-284. The interpretation of a statute is a question of law over which this court has plenary review. In Allied Mut.