Court Opinion

ID: 9505105
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 20:01:12.990084+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:04:16.139570
License: Public Domain

SHEPARD, Chief Justice,
concurring in result.
I agree with my colleagues about how the statute and the policy operate to calculate the per person coverage limits.
As to the claims of the four plaintiffs, Richard Jakupko’s injuries were so severe that they exceeded the limits of his coverage. Even if this were not so, I would say Richard’s insurance coverage would include those elements customary to tort damages, such as pain and suffering that flow from bodily injury.
Richard’s family members sustained lesser injuries in the accident, but likewise should be considered covered for their own standard common law damages.
Their emotional distress at witnessing Richard’s injuries stands on a different footing. I do not read my colleagues’ embrace of Wayne Township to suggest that a person who walks away from an accident without any damage to life or limb, not so much as a bruise, has suffered “bodily injury,” because he or she is “distressed.”