The Court of Appeals of North Carolina recently held that an insured’s adult daughter not living with the insured was entitled to coverage under the insured’s auto liability policy. Integon Nat. Ins. Co. v. Mooring, 2015 WL 2062042 (N.C. Ct. App. May 5, 2015)
The insured’s nineteen-year-old daughter was involved in an auto accident. The insured’s automobile liability insurer sought a declaration that the insured’s daughter was not an insured under the policy because she was not a resident of the insured’s household at the time of the accident. Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed, and judgment was rendered in favor of the insured and his daughter. The insurer appealed.
The policy definition of the term “Insured” included family members of the named Insured, and the policy defined the term “family member” as “a person related to [the policyholder] . . . who is a resident of [the policyholder’s] household.” The Court of Appeals noted that the policy did not define the terms “resident” or “household” and it therefore construed the terms broadly and in favor of coverage. The court further noted that, the insured’s daughter was wholly dependent on the insured in that he owned the residence where she lived and paid her living expenses. Accordingly, the court found that the daughter was a resident of the insured’s household at the time of the accident and affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the insured and his daughter.