or death is caused by an accident involving a motor vehicle” (emphasis added). Therefore, the legal issue presented here is whether the plaintiff “was injured in an accident involving such motor vehicle” within the meaning of 21 Del.C. § 2118 and Allstate’s PIP policy. As an initial matter, the tendency of courts interpreting individual motor vehicle insurance policy clauses, under compulsory insurance statutes, has been toward liberal construction in order to achieve the public policy objective of universal coverage. Morgan v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., Del.Super., 402 A.2d 1211, 1215 (1979). The fundamental purpose of Delaware’s financial responsibility laws is to protect and compensate all persons injured in automobile acciden C.A. No. 82C-C-109, Poppiti, J. (Feb. 8, 1984) (<HOLDING>). In Messick, the plaintiff was a tow truck
holding that plaintiff who slipped on ice while approaching her car lacked the necessary nexus with the yehicle and therefore was not an occupier of a motor vehicle holding that a genuine issue of material fact existed as to whether plaintiff who was approaching a car to enter it as a passenger was occupying a motor vehicle holding that there was a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment holding that summary judgment was improper where genuine issues of material fact existed as to whether prison officials prevented inmate from filing grievances holding that plaintiff failed to show genuine issue of material fact on equitable estoppel claim