Opinion ID: 1156712
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the petition alleges facts which might support recovery under the policy's uninsured motorist coverage

Text: The petition alleges that 1) while the insured was driving, an unidentified (hit-and-run) driver or passenger of another vehicle shot him; 2) as a result of the gunshot wound, the insured died and 3) his death was caused by the hit-and-run driver, or, in the alternative, directly and proximately caused by the negligence of that unidentified person. Because these allegations accommodate a host of scenarios, some of which could be actionable, we cannot conclusively rule, as a matter of law and on the basis of plaintiff's petition alone, that her quest for UM protection will fail. [16] The death could have been caused by a hit-and-run driver or occupant who, while target shooting from a moving or stationary vehicle, missed his intended mark and, instead, wounded the insured. [17] This scenario would unveil prima facie an unintentional act within the ambit of the insurance policy's hit-and-run UM coverage mandated by the provisions of 36 O.S. 1981 § 3636. [18] The law requires no physical contact with the offending vehicle for recovery under the hit-and-run UM protection. [19] In both the trial court and in the Court of Appeals this case was incorrectly treated as though the insurer had pressed for summary judgment rather than for the claim's dismissal. Even though the result reached by us today is similar to that of the Court of Appeals, that court's holding incorrectly settled the law of this case with respect to a significant part in controversy. [20] We will not speculate today on what the facts adduced at trial will show, or whether they will indeed develop into a scenario consistent with the parameters of the insurer's UM liability. [21] CERTIORARI IS GRANTED AND THE COURT OF APPEALS' OPINION IS VACATED; SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR THE INSURER IS REVERSED AND THE CASE IS REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THIS PRONOUNCEMENT. HARGRAVE, C.J., and HODGES, LAVENDER, DOOLIN and KAUGER, JJ., concur. SIMMS, ALMA WILSON and SUMMERS, JJ., dissent.