Dave Staffortd for www.theindianalawyer.com

A bicyclist killed by an unlicensed motorist who took her boyfriend’s truck without his permission may not seek damages against the company that insured the truck’s owner, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled Friday. The panel’s divided opinion in a matter of first impression reversed the judgment of a trial court.

Dissenting Judge Melissa May wrote that the majority’s opinion “would lead to harsh and unfair outcomes, because it would result in protection for drivers injured in motor vehicle accidents but would leave no remedy for pedestrians, bicyclists, or other persons who need not or cannot prove financial responsibility.”

Bike rider Brian Hoke died after he was struck by a truck driven by Pamela Coomer, and his estate sued her, Founders Insurance Co., and policyholder Mark May, with whom Coomer was in a relationship.

Marion Superior Judge Thomas J. Carroll granted Founders’ motions for summary judgment as it related to May and Coomer, but Carroll denied Founders’ summary judgment motion as it related to Hoke’s estate of Brian Hoke.

Writing for the majority, Judge Margret Robb reversed denial of summary judgment as it related to the estate, noting the exclusions in the insurance contract were clear, unambiguous and didn’t violate public policy.

“Here, the insurance contract excluded liability coverage for someone using the vehicle without a reasonable belief that he or she is entitled to do so,” Robb wrote in the majority opinion joined by Judge Paul Mathias. “The insurance contract further included the condition that no coverage would be afforded under the contract if the vehicle is being operated by a person who is an unlicensed driver for any reason. … These are clear and unambiguous provisions of the insurance contract reasonably limiting Founders’ risk to liability for the conduct of an insured who should and legally could be driving the vehicle.

“There is nothing inherent in the exclusions in the Founders insurance contract that make them against public policy, it is only the particular circumstances of this case that make enforcing them seem unjust,” Robb wrote. “However, it is neither logical nor consistent with the law of contracts that the enforceability of a contract of insurance depends upon the status of the person with whom the insured is involved in a collision.

“We have great sympathy for the Hokes and their loss.  However, ‘a third party’s right to recover through liability insurance is not absolute,’” Robb wrote, citing Colonial Penn Ins. Co. v. Guzorek, 690 N.E.2d 664 (Ind. 1997). “The dissent would base its decision on the public policy ‘that persons who suffer loss due to the tragedy of automobile accidents shall have a source and means of recovery,’ … and require Founders to be that source for Hoke’s Estate. However, the source and means of recovery is grounded in the insurance contract itself. The general policy of making insurance available to compensate for losses arising from motor vehicle collisions does not trump the long-standing precedent allowing an insurer to reasonably limit its liability, nor should the recompense of one victim take precedence over the importance of providing affordable insurance to all motorists.”

In her dissent, May noted Guzorek left unsettled the question of whether a liability insurer can deny coverage when the third party does not have protection against uninsured motorists.

“I believe a more useful statement of our public policy in this case is that ‘it is the policy of this state that persons who suffer loss due to the tragedy of automobile accidents shall have a source and means of recovery,’” May wrote, citing the language of Am. Underwriters Grp., Inc. v. Williamson, 496 N.E.2d 807, 810 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986), which was disapproved on other grounds in Guzorek.

“This policy typically guides courts in other jurisdictions who face fact situations like ours, and I believe that analysis strikes a better balance between protection of insured motorists and that of accident victims who are not motorists.

“I cannot join the majority opinion to the extent it would, in order to protect insurance companies from perceived ‘disparate treatment,’ deprive non-motorist accident victims of recovery that is available to accident victims who are motorists,” May wrote.

The case is Founders Insurance Company v. Mark May, Pamela Coomer, and Roger W. Hoke as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Brian Hoke, deceased,49A02-1501-PL-8.

Teryn Armstrong for www.theindianalawyers,com

On Oct. 9, Indianapolis attorney Carol Adinamis will become the third woman to serve as president of the Indiana State Bar Association in its 119-year history. While practicing business planning, estate planning, taxation and business law at Adinamis & Saunders has prepared her as a lawyer, her prior experience as vice president and president-elect of the ISBA will make Adinamis a well-rounded leader.

Carol Adinamis (IL photo/Eric Learned)

“I think it’s an honor to be chosen — just to be president, period,” Adinamis said. “Personally, I feel some sort of obligation to represent the women lawyers in the state of Indiana well. I want to make them proud of me.”

Although she’s developed a great deal of confidence over the years, Adinamis recalls feeling nervous when she joined the ISBA, and she admits, “I never imagined myself in this position when I first started.”

After graduating with a B.S. in accounting from Indiana University in 1987 then earning her J.D. from Indiana University Maurer School of Law in 1992, Adinamis became a member of the ISBA legal ethics committee and fell in love with what the legal organization had to offer.

“The state bar is the one place where I can say that being a woman, I haven’t been treated differently than men. … That’s the wonderful thing about this organization; there’s a place for everybody,” Adinamis said.

Throughout her time on the ethics committee, Adinamis served as chair for three years, along with other positions. It was during this time that Adinamis met family law attorney Patricia McKinnon.

McKinnon

“After watching her as a leader, I was struck by her ability to be respectful of differing viewpoints, but (also to) still keep the group focused on completing a task on time,” McKinnon said. “I took her aside when her time was up and asked her if she had ever been approached to be in leadership for the state bar. I asked her to consider it.”

Adinamis became inspired by McKinnon’s suggestion and soon found herself pursuing higher roles.

As she prepares for her year as president, Adinamis is looking forward to meeting more people and helping lawyers across the state.

“Over the years, I’ve figured the most enjoyable thing (about law) is the people that I meet.”

However, she also expects there to be moments when she’s tested.

“The challenge is going to be being that representative — representing attorneys in the state of Indiana and making sure that the bar association serves them well so that they get what they need in order to practice their area of law,” Adinamis said.

Adinamis will continue her work as a certified civil mediator and certified public accountant at Adinamis & Saunders throughout her one-year term, which will add to her already full schedule. But because she practices alongside her sister and husband, Adinamis has reliable support to help out when her to-do list becomes too long. Besides that, she’s had some practice in time management, having a full-time career with three children.

“The juggling is what you do when you’re faced with something new,” Adinamis said.

Jim Dimos, who transitioned Sept. 1 from Frost Brown Todd LLC to his new position as deputy executive director of the Chicago-based American Bar Association, also believes that Adinamis is up for the challenge. The two met through bar work, which is when Dimos first took note of the attorney’s commendable qualities.

Dimos

“Carol has the ability to listen to all (people),” Dimos said. “She makes them feel that their voice is being heard and works toward a resolution. … I think she will be a fantastic president for the ISBA.”

“What struck me about Carol is that she’s always calm, always respectful of differing viewpoints,” agreed McKinnon. “That’s certainly a different way to practice law.”

With high hopes and ample support, Adinamis plans to live up to the bar set by those who came before her.

“The people that have been president before me are just outstanding people, and I just want to build on that base and refine what we have to make it even stronger than it already is,” Adinamis said.

Her plans include improving CLE programs, providing practice tools for attorneys on the ISBA website, and leading a higher-level discussion about the future of the legal profession and how lawyers can stay relevant in the future.

“My mission is to advocate for lawyers in the state of Indiana and the justice system,” Adinamis said. “I think we best do that by helping lawyers practice law in a good way and making them more efficient at what they do.”•