Is This Crazy? Is It Absurd? Is It – Perhaps – Machiavellian?

There’s nothing funny about an STD – sexually transmitted disease.

And there’s nothing funny about HPV – human papillomavirus, which is an STD.

So this recent news story isn’t funny.

What I’m grappling with is…is this crazy?

Absurd?

Or perhaps…

Machiavellian?

Here’s the story:

I’ve read many articles about this, and discovered that each contained pieces of information that the others didn’t. Here’s what I’ve put together:

Missouri, 2017.

A woman and man have unprotected sex in his car.

In court documents she’ll be identified as “M.O.” and he as “M.B.”

M.B. is variously described as M.O.’s “then-romantic partner,” “then-significant other” and “then-beau.”

At some point, it appears the relationship ended.

In 2018 M.O. learned she had HPV – human papillomavirus.

Apparently M.O. believed that she’d contracted HPV from that encounter with that man – M.B. – in his car in 2017.

The man’s auto insurance carrier was GEICO.

You probably know GEICO from all their ads starring the GEICO gecko:

According to this article:

I learned that:

“She says the man was negligent and didn’t tell her about his health diagnosis, despite having a throat cancer tumor that was confirmed to be positive for HPV.”

She contacted GEICO.

According to the CNN article:

“In February 2021, the woman – anonymously identified in documents as M.O. – submitted a petition to GEICO directly. She alleged that her sexual partner negligently caused or ‘contributed to cause to be infected with HPV by not taking proper precautions and neglecting to inform and/or disclose his diagnosis,’ according to court documents, and that his ‘insurance policy provided coverage for her injuries and losses.’

“She made a final settlement offer of $1 million to resolve her claims, the documents say.”

I find it curious – one of many things about this story I’ll find curious – that the woman apparently wasn’t directly suing the man she believes gave her HPV, but rather his auto insurance company.

Curious, because there’s a plethora of law firms out there who are ready, willing and eager to take on your case against the person who infected you an STD, like this law firm:

Is it possible that M.O. decide to sue GEICO because of their deep pockets, which, according to a May 2022 article I found:

“GEICO revenue in Q1 was $9.554 billion, up from $8.923 billion in 2021 Q1, according to Berkshire’s 10-Q.”

Are deep pockets, indeed.

That “Berkshire’s”?

Think Berkshire Hathaway.

Think Warren Buffet.

According to this article:

“Warren Buffett has owned shares of Geico stock since 1951, and Geico became a wholly-owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway in 1996.”

Deeper than deep pockets.

Another curiosity for me: None of the articles mention the fact that even as the man was having unprotected sex with her, she was having unprotected sex with him.

Where is her responsibility here?

None of the articles explained why, after the HPV diagnosis in 2018, M.O. waited until February 2021 to contact GEICO.

Yes, one article said:

“At a gynecology exam about a year after the relationship began, the woman was diagnosed with HPV, according to court records.”

So that brings us to 2018 – why the lag time between 2018 and February 2021?

And…was the car the only place M.O. and M.B. had sex? No bedroom sex, no balcony sex, no sex anywhere else where she could have been infected?

Was M.B. the only sexual partner she had after that encounter in the car – no other sexual partners between 2017 and contacting GEICO in 2021?

None of the articles say.

So M.O. contacts GEICO and, according to this article:

“The insurance company refused the settlement offer, saying the woman’s claim did not occur because of normal use of the vehicle, according to court documents.”

Actually, people have been having sex in cars since cars were invented. Perhaps GEICO should have said “because of intended use of the vehicle”?

Either way, her request for $1 million was denied by GEICO.

After that, all the articles agree, M.O. and M.B. went into arbitration.

But none of the articles I read detailed what was being arbitrated here. Was the guy – M.B. – disputing that he and M.O. had sex? Had sex in his car? That he gave M.O. the infection? That his auto insurance carrier should pay her?

Don’t know.

But we know what the arbitrator decided.

The Associated Press article says:

“An arbitrator eventually determined she should be awarded $5.2 million for damages and her injuries. She then filed a motion in Jackson County Court seeking to confirm the award.”

“GEICO claimed it did not know the man and woman had entered into arbitration and, when it found out, it sought to intervene in the court case. The company argued the arbitration award was reached through collusion and fraud, violated its rights to due process and was unenforceable.”

Is it possible…just possible…that there was collusion between M.O. and M.B., figuring they’d get a cool $1 million from GEICO and share the spoils?

Don’t know.

This, from the NPR article:

“…in April of 2021, GEICO sued both M.O. and M.B. in federal court, asking the court to rule that the insurance company isn’t liable for the woman being infected with HPV, and that it doesn’t have a duty to defend the man from her claims against him.

“GEICO says the car owner’s claims for coverage should be dismissed because they’re barred by a number of legal doctrines, including ‘fraud, collusion, illegality, laches, and unclean hands.’”

What the heck are “laches”?

“A doctrine in equity that those who delay too long in asserting an equitable right will not be entitled to bring an action.”

And “unclean hands”?

“A legal doctrine which is a defense to a complaint, which states that a party who is asking for a judgment cannot have the help of the court if he/she has done anything unethical in relation to the subject of the lawsuit. Thus, if a defendant can show the plaintiff had ‘unclean hands,’ the plaintiff’s complaint will be dismissed or the plaintiff will be denied judgment.”

Looks like GEICO was pulling out all the stops.

Which brings us up to June 7:

“The Missouri Court of Appeals upheld a $5.2 million judgment on Tuesday involving a Jackson County, MO woman who said she unknowingly caught HPV, the human papillomavirus, during unprotected sex in the luxury sedan of a former male romantic partner in 2017.”

I have to pause here and wonder – what the hell does the car being a “luxury sedan” have to do with anything?

Is M.O. supposed to be mollified because she was allegedly infected with HPV in, as the Washington Post went on to put it:

“…2014 Hyundai Genesis – a luxury sedan that Kelley Blue Book raved ‘leaves very little to criticize.’”

And the NPR story was just as bad – their headline included an image that was similar to the car allegedly used, as though the make and model of the car have anything to do with anything:

Early on I was speculating about this story being absurd, and this part of the reporting certainly is.

So the Missouri Court of Appeals upheld the judgment against GEICO.

Now this, from the Kansas City Star:

“In a related federal court case, GEICO is contesting the idea that the claim is covered under its insurance policy. The outcome of that case would determine whether the company has to actually pay the settlement.

“Correction: An earlier version of this story erroneously stated that the decision by the Missouri Court of Appeals meant insurance company GEICO must pay the judgment claim. The insurance company is still contesting the decision in federal court, arguing that the claim is not covered under the policy.”

The NPR article noted:

“The federal case is set for a jury trial, which is currently slated to begin in a Kansas City courtroom in October. Since GEICO filed its federal suit more than a year ago, well over 100 docket entries have been made.”

So:

M.O. is unhappy. She has HPV and no money yet from GEICO.

M.B. is unhappy. He has HPV and HPV-caused cancer.

GEICO is unhappy. This pesky thing isn’t going to be resolved for months.

Guess who is happy about all this?

The lawyers.

Crazy?

Absurd?

Machiavellian?

I’m going back to my noting that M.O. apparently isn’t suing the guy she claims infected her with HPV – but rather his auto insurance company. If the federal court finds in favor of M.O., then…

If person A goes to the home of person B, and they have sex, and A is infected with an STD, does A sue B’s homeowner’s insurance company?

If persons C and D have bathroom sex on an airplane and one of them is infected with an STD, does that person sue the airline?

If persons E and F have sex under the stars in Yosemite National Park and one of them is infected with an STD, does that person sue the National Park Service?

I know that my questioning of M.O.’s story and motives will anger some people. That questioning any woman’s story and motives is deemed unsupportive of women, and worse – can have a negative impact on all women, as suggested by many following the Amber Heard/Johnny Depp recent court case: