Utah Supreme Court weighs whether UIM claims are barred by workers' compensation benefits in Hinton v. Midwest Family Mutual

The Utah Supreme Court heard argument in Hinton v. Midwest Family Mutual Insurance over whether benefits described in the Workers' Compensation Act can be excluded from recovery under underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage when those benefits are “paid or payable” or otherwise listed in the statute.

Mark Anderson, counsel for appellant Haley Hinton, told the court that UIM exists to compensate accident victims when a responsible driver’s liability insurance is insufficient and that the district court improperly foreclosed Hinton’s UIM claims by treating certain categories as categorically unavailable. "The problem with the exhaustion language in Rutherford," Anderson said, referring to Rutherford v. Truck Insurance Exchange, "is that it doesn't really make sense in the context of Utah workers' compensation" because the Labor Commission has continuing jurisdiction and benefits are rarely finally "exhausted." He urged a test that would deduct from UIM only amounts that have been paid, ordered by the Labor Commission, or agreed to…