Case Name: Shelita GIBBS v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1999-10-13
Citations: 746 So. 2d 685
Docket Number: No. 99-C-1242
Parties: Shelita GIBBS v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
Judges: Court composed of Chief Judge ROBERT J. KLEES, Judge WILLIAM H. BYRNES, III, Judge MOON LANDRIEU, Judge MICHAEL E. KIRBY and Judge ROBERT A. KATZ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 746
Pages: 685–689

Head Matter:
Shelita GIBBS v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
No. 99-C-1242.
Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Fourth Circuit.
Oct. 13, 1999.
Writ Denied Jan. 14, 2000.
Wayne J. Lee, Barry W. Ashe, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann & Hutchinson, L.L.P., New Orleans, Louisiana and Terrill W. Boykin, Stephen J. Moore, Jeffrey C. Vaughn, Rodney, Bordenave, Boy-kin, Bennette & Boyle, New Orleans, Louisiana, Counsel for Defendants/Relators.
Cleo Fields, Kenneth Fabre, The Fields Law Firm, Baton Rouge, Counsel for Plaintiff-Respondent.
Court composed of Chief Judge ROBERT J. KLEES, Judge WILLIAM H. BYRNES, III, Judge MOON LANDRIEU, Judge MICHAEL E. KIRBY and Judge ROBERT A. KATZ.

Opinion:
| .BYRNES, Judge.
This Court has granted the application of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company and Jeffery K. Jenkins in order to determine whether LSA-R.S. 32:866 (the "no pay, no play" statute) may be used to deprive the uninsured owner of a parked vehicle of the right to recover property damage where there is no allegation of comparative negligence.
On October 14, 1998, Jenkins' vehicle struck an unoccupied, parked vehicle owned by the plaintiff-respondent, Shelita Gibbs. Ms. Gibbs sued the relators, Jenkins and his insurer, State Farm. Ms. Gibbs did not have insurance.
State Farm moved for summary judgment contending that the literal wording of LSA-R.S. 32:866 applies to parked vehicles, especially in view of the fact that Ms. Gibbs failed to have her vehicle de-regis-tered pursuant to LSA-R.S. 32:861(A)(3).
The trial court denied relators' motion, ruling that LSA-R.S. 32:866 does not apply to parked vehicles. We agree. The purpose of LSA-R.S. 32:866 is to discourage the operation of uninsured vehicles. To apply the law to parked | ¡.vehicles would do nothing toward accomplishing that purpose, i.e., in legal parlance one could say that to read the law as suggested by relators leads to absurd consequences. Likewise, LSA-R.S. 32:861(A)(3) was not intended to deprive owners of parked vehicles of the right to recover property damage. Nothing in LSA-R.S. 32:861(A)(3) either explicitly or implicitly suggests the result contended for by the relators.
However, as this matter is res nova, and as it is possible to read LSA-R.S. 32:866 as suggested by relators, we find that State Farm's refusal to pay cannot be characterized as arbitrary or capricious under LSA-R.S. 22:1220.
For the foregoing reasons, we grant re-lators' application for supervisory writs, but deny relief and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
WRIT GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED; JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.
KLEES, C.J., and KATZ, J., CONCUR WITH REASONS.
LANDRIEU, J., DISSENTS WITH REASONS.