Insurance-Related Litigation
Interpretation of Insurance Policy
Except as indicated, all indented material is copied directly from the court’s opinion.
Decisions of the Tennessee Supreme Court
Opinions of the Tennessee Court of Appeals
McCoy v. Conway, No. M2021-00921-COA-R3-CV, p. 3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2022).
The issue in this appeal requires us to interpret both the language of the Allstate insurance policy, and the relevant Tennessee uninsured motorist statutes. Accordingly, our analysis is guided by several well-established principles. First, Tennessee law is clear that questions regarding the extent of insurance coverage present issues of law involving the interpretation of contractual language. Clark v. Sputniks, LLC, Maggart v. Almany Realtors, Inc., 368 S.W.3d 431, 436 (Tenn.2012); 259 S.W.3d 700, 703 (Tenn. 2008). Likewise, questions regarding the interpretation of a statute involve issues of law. In re Estate of Trigg, 368 S.W.3d 483, 490 (Tenn. 2012). Therefore, our standard of review is de novo with no presumption of correctness afforded to the conclusions reached by the trial court. U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Tenn. Farmers Mut. Ins. Co., 277 S.W.3d 381, 386 (Tenn. 2009).
Powell v. Clark, 487 S.W.3d 528, 531–32 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2015).
