Court Opinion

ID: 9593003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:18:47.105748+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:14:18.308208
License: Public Domain

*681Morgan, J.
(concurring) — In general, I agree with the majority’s reasoning and result. I write separately because I want to emphasize how peculiar this case is.
As the majority holds, a court should not allow co-claimants to affect a UIM carrier’s obligations by unilaterally allocating the proceeds of liability insurance among themselves.5 Accordingly, a court should treat as a single, combined entity those co-claimants who elect to receive joint payments from the liability carrier.6 In doing this, however, a court generally should include the same claimants in the minuend as in the subtrahend.7 For example, if a court includes claimants A and B in the subtrahend, it should include claimants A and B in the minuend. If a court includes claimants A, B, and C in the subtrahend, it should include claimants A, B, and C in the minuend.
The peculiarity inherent in this case is that the majority includes claimants A, B, and C (Glenna, the estate and Gordon) in the subtrahend, but only claimants A and B (Glenna and the estate) in the minuend. This is correct only because Glenna and Gordon agreed that his claim would not be presented to the arbitrators for valuation. If his claim had been presented, we should today use a subtrahend that represents the liability coverage available to A, B, and C (Glenna, the estate, and Gordon), and a minuend that represents the combined amounts legally owed to A, B, and C (Glenna, the estate, and Gordon).
Reconsideration denied March 9, 1999.
Review denied at 138 Wn.2d 1012 (1999).

Cramer v. PEMCO Ins. Co., 67 Wn. App. 563, 566, 842 P.2d 479 (1992); cf. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Dejbod, 63 Wn. App. 278, 286, 818 P.2d 608 (1991) (UIM carrier not liable merely because claimant voluntarily settles with tortfeasor).

Cramer, 67 Wn. App. at 566.

For definitions of minuend and subtrahend, see Mailloux v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 76 Wn. App. 507, 510-11, 887 P.2d 449 (1995).