Justice David Schmidt
Ellis was injured when he was struck by and fell off of his flatbed tow truck while attempting to unchain a van from it when a forklift operator began lifting the van before Ellis could get off. The flatbed was insured by United Financial Casualty, and Ellis filed a claim for no-fault benefits. United denied the claim arguing Ellis' injury did not arise from the use or operation of a motor vehicle. It cross-moved for summary judgment dismissal arguing he was not eligible for no-fault benefits as his vehicle was not the cause of his injuries. United concurred Ellis satisfied the first two prongs of the Gholson test that for an injury to qualify for no-fault benefits it must arise from the inherent nature of the vehicle, and occur within the natural territorial limits of the car, and use, loading or unloading must still be in progress. Yet, United claimed Ellis' truck did not cause his injury, thus he failed to satisfy the third prong—the car must not merely contribute to the injury, but must actually produce it. The court disagreed noting Ellis was unloading his van while standing on his insured truck, and his injuries occurred as a result of being hit while on his vehicle and falling off of it. Hence, Ellis's motion for a declaration United was obligated to provide no-fault benefits was granted.
