AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• In 2013, the plaintiff was involved in an auto collision while operating a 2011 Ford F250. At the time, the plaintiff had automobile and off-road vehicle policies with Allstate, the latter insuring her 2011 Polaris Ranger RZR ("RZR"). Following the collision, the plaintiff settled with the responsible party for $25,000 and filed a claim against Allstate for underinsured motorist benefits. An arbitration panel awarded the plaintiff $425,000, which Allstate moved to reduce to $275,000, arguing it exceeded the policy limits when accounting for the settlement received from the responsible party (paras 3-5).

Procedural History

• District Court of Valencia County: Modified the arbitration award from $425,000 to $275,000 on Allstate's motion (para 1).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff: Argued that the RZR is a vehicle under the New Mexico Mandatory Financial Responsibility Act (MFRA), her policy insuring the RZR should be reformed to include UM/UIM coverage, and Allstate waived the application of the statutory offset per her automobile insurance policy's language (para 1).
• Defendant (Allstate): Contended that the RZR is not subject to the MFRA as it is an off-highway motor vehicle, the policy insuring the RZR correctly excluded UM/UIM coverage, and the plaintiff's recovery should be offset by the amount received from the tortfeasor's insurer, limiting her recovery to $275,000 (paras 2, 4).

Legal Issues

• Whether the RZR is considered a vehicle under the New Mexico Mandatory Financial Responsibility Act (MFRA).
• Whether the plaintiff's policy insuring the RZR should include uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage.
• Whether Allstate waived the application of the New Mexico statutory offset per the language of the plaintiff's automobile insurance policy.

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's decision to modify the arbitration award to $275,000 (para 26).

Reasons

• Per Medina, J. (Bogardus, J., and Ives, J., concurring):
  The Court held that the RZR is not subject to the MFRA as it is an off-highway motor vehicle only operated on the highway for the purpose of crossing, thus Allstate was not required to offer UM/UIM coverage or obtain a signed coverage rejection for the policy insuring the RZR (paras 2, 10-21).
  The Court found that the district court correctly determined that the plaintiff's recovery from the tortfeasor's insurer should be deducted from the applicable policy limits rather than the arbitration award, supporting the modification of the award to $275,000 (paras 22-25).