Court Opinion

ID: 9451841
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 17:24:53.006952+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:32:55.148516
License: Public Domain

CRAVEN, District Judge
(dissenting).
Once again we are perforce attempting to determine a question of Virginia state law in advance of decision by Virginia’s highest court. See: Travelers Indemnity Co. of Hartford, Conn. v. Wells, 316 F.2d 770 (4th Cir. 1963); Note, 51 Va.L.Rev. 1387, 1443 (1965).
I do not think Bryant v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 205 Va. 897, 140 S.E.2d 817 (1965), controls this case. It teaches only that an injured person may look to more than one Uninsured Motorist policy where more than one is available. Here, there is only one such policy. The question of subrogation confronting us was not present in Bryant. The statute (quoted in the majority opinion) allows Nationwide subrogation “to the extent that payment was made * * I think it means what it says, and I respectfully dissent.