does not disrupt the arrangement adopted in Lowe or, more specifically, deprive the plaintiff of the ‘benefit’ intended for the plaintiff by that arrangement, i.e., litigating all its claims in one proceeding.” 73 So.3d at 1222-23 (Murdock, J., dissenting) (emphasis added). Trotter identifies no authority mandating, in every case, a waiver of subrogation rights. In light of the foregoing, we conclude that Alfa has demonstrated a clear legal right to have its motion to realign the parties granted and to allow it to opt out of the underlying litigation. No authority is cited requiring that, in order to make the permitted election, Alfa must first release the right of subrogation to which it is also clearly entitled. See Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Turner, 662 So.2d 237, 240 (Ala.1995) (<HOLDING>). As a result, Alfa’s petition for the writ of
holding that an insurer that pays underinsured motorist benefits to a party pursuant to a wrongful death claim is entitled to subrogation from the wrongdoer holding that the insurance applicable to the tortfeasors vehicle must be compared to the underinsured vehicle policy limits to determine whether a vehicle is underinsured holding that money received by plan participant pursuant to an uninsured motorist policy was within scope of plans subrogation provisions holding emotional distress is a distinct claim from wrongful death holding that plaintiffs failure to prove decedents death was caused by the wrongful acts of the defendant precludes any recovery of wrongful death damages under mississippis wrongful death statute