Court upholds ins co's denial of coverage for skydiving death

[mdwhalen 0]

The short version of this is that the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (which includes AR, IA, MN, MO, NE, ND, SD) recently upheld an insurer's denial of coverage for accidental death under an insurance policy that excluded deaths resulting from "Riding in a vehicle or device for aerial navigation . . . except while riding as a passenger, and not as a pilot or crew member, in any aircraft being used for the transportation of passengers"

Michael Adams died on April 29, 2000, in a high-speed landing accident in Missouri. The Eighth Circuit first recognized that other jurisdictions were equally split as to whether parachuting or similar activities are considered an activity involving "aerial navigation" or some other "aeronautical" action.

According to the opinion, courts in FL, LA, TX, IL and MI have held the exclusion did not preclude coverage; while other courts in TX and courts in KA, PA, GA and UT have denied coverage in similar situations (some involve hang gliders and waterski kites). The Eighth Circuit alligned itself with the latter group excluding coverage concluding that since a parachute pilot can control the canopy he or she is therefore involved in "aerial navigation." Again this is a new decision but only controls federal law in the Eighth Circuit - not necessarily even state law in that circuit. It is an ERISA decision which may explain why it was in federal court not state court.

The Court notes that a skydiver "has some control over his or her direction such that if he or she wanted to set out in a particular direction, he or she could manipulate his or her hands, body, or the chute's ropes and wings to achieve a change of direction." Obviously not a very sophisticated understanding of our sport.

I have attached a .pdf copy of the opinion for those of you interested.

"I have magic buttons ;)." skymama

[Nutz 0]

I don't understand why this is news. It is common knowledge that most life insurance policies exclude general aviation. Skydiving is a part of general aviation.

[mdwhalen 0]

It depends on the specific exclusionary language in the policy and the state in which it is being construed. Assuming you have a choice between companies with differently worded exclusions it could mean the difference between having insurance coverage and not. If life insurance is not a concern of yours, then you are right, the post is of no concern either, that's why I included the subject in the topic.

"I have magic buttons ;)." skymama

[BigM 2]

FWIW_ I live in Georgia. I had taken out a ten year term policy about 2 years before taking up skydiving. Due to similar concerns, I sat down with my State Farm agent and went over my policy. End result- I am covered. Even when I get a new policy, I will still be covered, just at a higher rate.

Blue 111-
Jeff

"When I die, I want to go like my grandmother, who died peacefully in her sleep. Not screaming like all the passengers in her car."

[firstime 0]

Hi BIGEM,
I am also covered even in view that I told them that
I jump. I was given a rate higher than most (wuffos)
maybe 30% . They do not exclude extreme sports,
just charge extra. It's a real grey area with policy
exclusions that most (skydivers) should examine your policy in it's entirety. It's an area that some Ins. co's can get off at the time of loss. Just be very careful of "non disclosure". I work in Insurance and I
do like the comfort of their indemnity clause but I
DON'T like their ambiguity with policy endorsements
and exclusions So everyone... do your homework.
It varies from State to State.