Can you sue an insurance company if you were shot in a drive by?

Opinion:No, you have no reason to sue an insurance company if you were deliberately harmed by another source Answer:Yes, you can sue anyone you want; however, you may not be successful (you likely will not win) unless you have a significant reason to support their liability.

Answer:

If you were yourself a car owner and maintained Personal Injury Protection on your own car, you may have a claim for benefits under certain defined circumstances. Personal Injury Protection coverage is sometimes referred to as "no-fault coverage" and pays a portion of your medical expenses and lost wages as a result of a motor vehicle mishap, irrespective of who caused the incident.

Very broadly, if it can be shown that the incident occurred in such a way that it was connected to your operation of your car, you may have an arguable claim to benefits against your own Personal Injury Protection coverage. If the insurer denies the claim, you may wish to consider suit against the insurer. That said, State court decisions differ on how close the nexus must be between the operation of your vehicle and the resulting injury, so every matter is considered on its own facts.

As far as suing the shooter's insurer, many States have statutes that preclude "direct actions". This means that the injured party may not sue directly the insurer of the person who did the harm. Instead, that person must be sued, and in many cases, his/her insurer cannot even be named in the lawsuit.

Furthermore, most insurance policies specifically exclude coverage for intentional acts, which a drive-by shooting would seem to be. Therefore, the insurer would probably be able to "deny coverage" to its insured because the act was not within the scope of the risks assumed by the insured. That is, a liability insurance policy usually only provides coverage for negligent (careless) acts, not intentional ones. Accordingly, it may not be worthwhile for the injured party to file suit unless the person who did the shooting had assets from which to satisfy the claim.