Cross References
Applicability of article to captive insurers, see §431:19-115.5.
Law Journals and Reviews
Tort and Insurance "Reform" in a Common Law Court. 14 UH L. Rev. 55.
Case Notes
Rent-a-car company's rental agreement provision, which attempted to shift primary responsibility for providing minimum insurance coverage to the renter's personal insurance policy, violated the public policy enumerated in this chapter. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.
The owner of a vehicle has the primary obligation to provide minimum coverage for the owned vehicle and this obligation may not be avoided through a unilateral contract with a permissive user of the vehicle. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.
When a defendant is charged with a violation of this article, §805-13 is the proper procedural statute for the district court, enforcement officers, and the prosecutor's office to follow. 86 H. 331 (App.), 949 P.2d 171.
As §1-1 does not establish the supremacy of the 1840 Constitution over the current state constitution, or somehow render the documents concurrent, whether chapter 431 violated the 1840 Constitution was immaterial for purposes of defendant's conviction. 90 H. 130 (App.), 976 P.2d 444.
§431:10C-104 Conditions of operation and registration of motor vehicles. (a) Except as provided in section 431:10C-105, no person shall operate or use a motor vehicle upon any public street, road, or highway of this State at any time unless such motor vehicle is insured at all times under a motor vehicle insurance policy.
(b) Every owner of a motor vehicle used or operated at any time upon any public street, road, or highway of this State shall obtain a motor vehicle insurance policy upon such vehicle which provides the coverage required by this article and shall maintain the motor vehicle insurance policy at all times for the entire motor vehicle registration period.
(c) Any person who violates the provisions of this section shall be subject to the provisions of section 431:10C-117(a).
(d) The provisions of this article shall not apply to any vehicle owned by or registered in the name of any agency of the federal government, or to any antique motor vehicle as defined in section 249-1. [L 1987, c 347, pt of §2; am L 1989, c 195, §31; am L 1996, c 56, §2; am L 1997, c 251, §14]
Case Notes
Car rental company's use limitation provision not violative of compliance with minimum insurance requirements as limitation provision is proper exercise of company's authority to restrict scope of a renter's permissive use. 82 H. 351, 922 P.2d 964.
Section requires motor vehicle owner to insure vehicle for periods and amounts established; it does not mandate that insurers provide coverage for any and all accidents that occur on a public road, street, or highway. 82 H. 351, 922 P.2d 964.
Against public policy for rent-a-car company vehicle owner to acquire coverage for its vehicles as required by subsection (b) by contractually shifting primary responsibility for providing minimum insurance coverage to permissive user's policy and providing liability coverage under the unilateral contract with the permissive user only where user's personal insurance policy is insufficient to meet the minimum statutorily required amount. 88 H. 274, 965 P.2d 1274.
Obtaining insurance after trial has concluded is an insufficient basis to obtain either a new trial, an amended judgment, or relief from judgment under this section. 90 H. 441, 978 P.2d 879.
Subsection (b) applied to defendant, where defendant argued that traffic statutes involved only applied to businesses and state vehicles; subsection (b) did not violate defendant's freedom of movement. 77 H. 222 (App.), 883 P.2d 644.
Driving without no-fault insurance is a "traffic offense". 78 H. 33 (App.), 889 P.2d 1092.
Even if police had specific articulable facts to believe defendant committed offense, police were not authorized to order defendant out of defendant's car, physically arrest defendant, and search defendant incident thereto. 78 H. 98 (App.), 890 P.2d 685.
State must prove beyond reasonable doubt three elements in order to convict a driver who is not the owner of the vehicle. 86 H. 331 (App.), 949 P.2d 171.
State of mind of defendant is an element of an offense under this section; court must presume that borrower of motor vehicle reasonably believed vehicle was insured; in order to convict defendant, State must prove that state of mind of a person who borrowed an uninsured motor vehicle was "knowing" or "reckless". 86 H. 331 (App.), 949 P.2d 171.
When a defendant is charged with a violation of this section, §805-13 is the proper procedural statute for the district court, enforcement officers, and the prosecutor's office to follow. 86 H. 331 (App.), 949 P.2d 171.
Self-insurance under §431:10C-105 should be considered a defense, which the prosecution need not disprove unless some evidence to support the defense has been introduced. 90 H. 130 (App.), 976 P.2d 444.
Section: Previous 431-10b-113 431-10b-114 431-10c-101 431-10c-102 431-10c-103 431-10c-103.5 431-10c-103.6 431-10c-104 431-10c-104.5 431-10c-105 431-10c-106 431-10c-107 431-10c-108 431-10c-109 431-10c-110 NextLast modified: October 27, 2016