Opinion ID: 1934281
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Pro Rata Provisions Missouri's Jurisprudence

Text: Missouri courts have recognized that insurance companies may effectively limit their coverage obligations with an explicit pro rata provision in the terms of the policy. See Harold S. Schwartz & Assocs., Inc. v. Continental Casualty Co., Mo.Ct.App., 705 S.W.2d 494 (1985). In Schwartz, the policy contained express pro rata language. [T]he limit of liability under this policy ... shall be limited to the proportion of the total loss and expense which the number of utterances or disseminations during the period of this policy bears to the total number of all utterances or disseminations. Id. at 496. Conversely, the Missouri Court of Appeals has held that where a policy is silent on proration, the insurance company is jointly and severally liable to the full extent of the policyholder's loss (i.e.. all sums). Tinsley v. Aetna Ins. Co., 199 Mo.App. 693, 205 S.W. 78 (1918). In Tinsley, Aetna provided $10,000 of coverage on a vessel through four separate policies. In addition, the policyholder purchased coverage from another insurer to bring the total insurance on the vessel to approximately $15,000. After the policyholder brought an action to recover on one of the Aetna policies with a limit of $1,000, the insurance company argued that the policyholder was not in any event entitled to recover more than one-fifteenth of the amount of the loss. The Missouri Court of Appeals rejected the insurance company's attempt to rewrite the policy and upheld a jury verdict for almost the full policy limit: But the policy sued upon contains no pro rata clause. And in the absence of a provision in the policy to the contrary, it is held the insured may recover the full amount of his loss from any insurer, leaving the latter to seek contribution. Tinsley v. Aetna Ins. Co., 199 Mo.App. 693, 205 S.W. at 81 (emphasis added).