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 the early morning of June 21, 2013, an uninsured motorist fleeing from police collided with Thomas J. Swiech's unoccupied vehicle, causing property damage but no bodily injury. Swiech sought coverage for the property damage under his UM/UIM policy with Fred Loya Insurance Company, which paid the policy's limit for property damage. Swiech then demanded punitive damages from his UM/UIM bodily injury coverage, which Loya denied (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court of Bernalillo County: The court ruled in favor of Swiech, allowing him to recover punitive damages over the property damage coverage limit from his UM/UIM bodily injury coverage, and awarded him attorney fees (paras 5-13).

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant-Appellant (Loya): Argued that it had fulfilled its contractual obligations by paying the policy limit for property damage and that Swiech was not entitled to recover punitive damages from the UM/UIM bodily injury coverage since he sustained no bodily injury (paras 5-8).
• Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff-Appellee (Swiech): Contended that he was entitled to punitive damages from the UM/UIM bodily injury coverage because the uninsured motorist’s conduct warranted such damages and the policy did not preclude him from seeking them (paras 6-7).

Legal Issues

• Whether an insurer that has paid the full amount of the policy’s UM/UIM property damage coverage limits is required to pay from the policy’s separate UM/UIM bodily injury coverage limits amounts representing punitive damages arising solely from property damage (para 1).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s ruling that allowed Swiech to recover punitive damages from his UM/UIM bodily injury coverage and its award of attorney fees to Swiech (para 29).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, with Chief Judge Vanzi writing, held that punitive damages are recoverable under a UM/UIM policy only from, and not exceeding, the UM/UIM property damage coverage limits. The court reasoned that punitive damages must be predicated upon actual damages and awarded for the same conduct that caused the actual damages. Since Swiech only sustained property damage and exhausted the coverage limit for UM/UIM property damage, he could not recover additional policy proceeds from the UM/UIM coverage limits for bodily injury. The court also found that the district court abused its discretion in denying Loya’s motion to seal confidential mediation communications (paras 17-28).