Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 28.22.231 (2026)

Policy coverage exclusions

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 28.22.231. Policy coverage exclusions.
The uninsured and underinsured motorists coverage required under this chapter does not apply to bodily injury or death or damage to or destruction of property of an insured
     (1) while occupying a motor vehicle owned by, but not insured by, the named insured or the insured's spouse or relative residing in the same household; or

     (2) through being struck by a vehicle owned by the named insured or the insured's spouse or relative residing in the same household.




Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Burton v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 796 P.2d 1361 (Alaska 1990).
Burton v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 796 P.2d 1361 (Alaska 1990). “130(1) (now AS 28.22.231(1)). A clear implication of this provision is that if an insured is occupying an insured vehicle owned by him, he is protected by his underinsured motor vehicle coverage.”
Lemen v. Allstate Ins., 938 F. Supp. 640 (D. Haw. 1995). “445 (d)(1) (1994) (stating that UIM coverage does not apply to bodily injury to an insured (Lemen) that occurs while insured is in a vehicle owned by, but not insured by, the named insured or the insured's relative (Lemen) residing in the same household); Alaska Stat. §…”
Umialik Ins. Co. v. Safet Miftari, Umialik Ins. Co. v. Safet Miftari (Alaska 2024). · cites it 10× “”9 It argues that UIM coverages are “vehicle- and policy- specific” and that if it must cover vehicles not listed on the policy, “the consumer is receiving coverage for those additional vehicles without having paid for it — i.e., a free ride.”
Alaska Stat. § 28.22.231(1): 2 cases
Burton v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 796 P.2d 1361 (Alaska 1990). “130(1) (now AS 28.22.231(1)). A clear implication of this provision is that if an insured is occupying an insured vehicle owned by him, he is protected by his underinsured motor vehicle coverage.”
Umialik Ins. Co. v. Safet Miftari, Umialik Ins. Co. v. Safet Miftari (Alaska 2024). “”9 It argues that UIM coverages are “vehicle- and policy- specific” and that if it must cover vehicles not listed on the policy, “the consumer is receiving coverage for those additional vehicles without having paid for it — i.e., a free ride.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.