Uninsured Motorist Coverage denied where insured suggests erratic driving was intentional

Kimberly Gray was seriously injured in a motor vehicle collision.  She attributed the other, unidentified, driver's erratic behavior to a fit of "road rage" over lane usage on the highway.  Citing her description, MEEMIC refused to pay Gray's Uninsured Motorist Coverage to her, using the the at-fault's "intentional" conduct as a defense.  The Court of Appeals agreed with MEEMIC and ruled that the insurer did not have to stand in the shoes of the erratic driver, even though the driver and her own insurer--had they been capable of identification--would have been legally responsible for her erratic, "intentional" conduct.