Insurance – Auto – UIM – Stacking Prohibited – Insurers’ Liability

Defendant’s decedent, a deputy sheriff, was killed in an auto accident while he was driving a patrol vehicle. Decedent’s personal vehicle was insured by plaintiff Progressive with underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) totaling $200,000, and he was listed as an insured on his parents’ Allstate policy, which also provided a total of $200,000 in UIM coverage. Since no insured vehicle was involved in decedent’s accident, the UIM coverages may not be stacked, and defendant is only entitled to the total $200,000 in UIM coverage ($100,000 from each insurer) that he has already received.

We affirm the district court’s rulings.

Even though defendant’s notice of appeal was filed before the district court resolved all of the claims before it, since the district court resolved the remaining claims prior to our consideration of this appeal, and since Rule 54(b), FRCP, would have allowed the district court to certify the order against defendant for immediate appeal, we may consider defendant’s appeal pursuant to the doctrine of cumulative finality.

Although the Allstate policy covers two vehicles while the Progressive policy covers only one vehicle, that does not change the UIM coverage available to decedent’s estate under South Carolina law. Thus, the district court correctly rejected Progressive’s claim that it was only responsible for one-third of its UIM coverage limit. Progressive cannot argue that defendant cannot stack coverages for the purpose of determining the estate’s recovery while also contending that it may stack the same coverages for the purpose of determining the portion of the estate’s recovery it is required to pay.

Affirmed.

Progressive Northern Insurance Co. v. Ladue (Lawyers Weekly No. 003-031-23, 10 pp.) (Per Curiam) No. 21-1680. Appealed from USDC at Charleston, S.C. (David Norton, J.) J.R. Murphy for appellants; Johnston Cox for appellee. United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (unpublished)