Court Opinion

ID: 9527623
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:32:01.970789+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:25:59.455005
License: Public Domain

BARHAM, Justice
(concurring).
We granted writs of certiorari in closely related questions — basically the issue of interpreting uninsured motorist provisions as either requiring “stacking” or as only providing excess coverage. We should not decide these cases piecemeal. Each is determined by the holding in the others.
The question presented is a difficult one of contract interpretation, statutory interpretation, and public policy consideration. Although I am of the opinion that the majority view here expressed may be the correct view, the majority opinion does not meet all of the issues raised by diligent counsel for the litigants. It does not sufficiently set forth legal reasoning, law, or jurisprudence to sustain the result which is obtained.
I respectfully concur, reserving the right to take a contrary view on rehearing and upon a consideration of all of the cases we have under advisement.