O'Rourke v. Colonial Insurance Co.

The O’Rourkes (plaintiffs), a Tennessee couple, were involved in an automobile accident with an uninsured driver in Mississippi. The O’Rourkes’ car that was involved in the accident was insured by State Farm with uninsured motorist (UM) coverage. The O’Rourkes owned another vehicle that was insured by Colonial Insurance Company (Colonial) (defendant) that also had UM coverage, but it excluded policy benefits to persons injured in a vehicle owned by the O’Rourkes but not insured by Colonial. The O’Rourkes filed a claim in state court in Mississippi against the uninsured motorist, State Farm, and Colonial. The O’Rourkes contended that the uninsured motorist’s negligence was the proximate cause of the accident and that under Mississippi law, they were entitled to benefits under both of their insurance policies. Mississippi law favors stacking of uninsured-motorist policies and would render the exclusion under the O’Rourkes’ Colonial policy unenforceable. Colonial moved for summary judgment and argued that Tennessee law controlled, and under Tennessee law, the exclusion was valid and enforceable. The trial court, applying the center-of-gravity test, found that Tennessee had the greater contacts and applied Tennessee law and granted Colonial’s motion and dismissed the case. The O’Rourkes appealed and argued that notwithstanding Tennessee being the center, the court should apply the public-policy exception and apply Mississippi law because it favors stacking uninsured-motorist coverage.