Court Opinion

ID: 9795681
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 03:35:42.987881+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:31:25.554966
License: Public Domain

Justice EID,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent from the majority's opinion for many of the reasons identified by Justice Coats. In my view, Parker's action against USAA for recovery of underinsured motorist benefits is not an "actio[n] brought to recover damages for personal injuries" under section 18-21-101(1), C.R.S. (2008). The nature of the injury stated in Parker's claim against USAA is not a "personal inju-H ry." Instead, he alleges a purely monetary injury stemming from USAA's failure to pay underinsured motorist ("UIM") benefits. Therefore, prejudgment interest on the claim is not calculated under section 18-21-101(1), as the majority holds, but rather under seetion 5-12-102(1)(a), C.R.S. (2008), which applies to "money ... wrongfully withheld." The fact that our UIM statute requires insurers to provide coverage for "damage for bodily injury," § 10-4-609(4), C.R.S. (2008), does not transform a claim against an insurer to recover the benefits of that coverage into an action for "personal injury." Maj. op. at 358-59. Nor does the fact that the legislature may have intended through its UIM legislation to place a driver who has been injured by an underinsured motorist in the same position as if the underinsured motorist had adequate insurance coverage, maj. op. at 359, change the language of section 18-21-101(1), which only applies to actions to recover damages for personal injury. Because, in my view, this is not such an action, I respectfully dissent.