An Indiana appeals panel has reversed an insurer's summary judgment win in a dispute over whether an injured police officer qualifies for uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. 

The September 16, 2026 decision sent the case back to the trial court on two threshold issues, with instructions to deny Argonaut Insurance Company's motion and grant the officer's cross-motion for partial summary judgment. 

The incident goes back to February 2023. The officer - a Highland Police patrol member - drove his cruiser to a Kohl's store to investigate a suspected shoplifting. He parked near the suspect's SUV, left the engine running, and walked over to make contact. The suspect ran, jumped into his vehicle, and threw it into reverse. The open driver's door dragged the officer backward and crushed him against a parked car. The whole sequence took about sixty seconds from the moment the officer stepped out of his cruiser. 

The officer filed his complaint on February 18, 2025 - two years and one day after the incident. Argonaut, the police department's uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) carrier, argued the two-year deadline had already passed. The officer's counter was simple: the filing deadline fell on a legal holiday. Indiana statute designates the third Monday in February as Washington's Birthday "for all purposes." Argonaut pointed to a memorandum from Governor Eric Holcomb shifting the holiday for state employees to December 26, 2025. The appeals panel sided with the officer, holding that moving a holiday for state employees does not rewrite the statutory calendar for filing deadlines. The complaint was timely. 

The second issue was whether the officer was still "occupying" his cruiser when he was hit. The Argonaut policy defined "occupying" as being "in, upon, getting in, on, out, or off" a covered vehicle. Indiana's four-factor test looks at the distance from the vehicle, the time since exit, the chance to reach safety, and what the person planned to do with the vehicle. Every factor cut the officer's way. He was struck less than sixty seconds after stepping out. He parked close by. He planned to return to the cruiser to run the suspect's name through the onboard database and, if needed, use it for transport. He had no chance to reach safety. 

Argonaut argued the cruiser was not physically involved in the collision. The panel was unmoved, citing precedent where officers and truck drivers qualified as "occupying" vehicles that played no part in the accident itself. What matters is the claimant's ongoing connection to the vehicle, not whether it was in the crash. 

For claims teams and UIM underwriters, the takeaway is practical: occupancy follows the relationship between the claimant and the vehicle, not physical contact. 

The decision was handed down on September 16, 2026, and may be subject to further review. The findings discussed are based on court documents and do not necessarily reflect the final resolution of all claims.