ZeroHedge article with their typical bait title.
Some of the comments expand further on why this happened (no surprise, the insurance company being a POS to their paying customer):
Geico let the lawsuit go on through judgment without defending its insured as required by the contract for which the insured paid premiums. Poor guy had a multi-million dollar judgment entered against him. Another judge later found that Geico should have defended its insured. Geico said, okay, let's start over then and retry the original case. Court said no, you should have defended your insured from the get-go.
That's why it is Geico's fault. If you're ever sued for something stupid and your insurance company that you've been paying for years to defend you from such lawsuits tells you to pound sand due to some technicality, you would get it.
What kind of insurance are we talking about? Car insurance? That's sounds like a retarded decision by the court. Why on earth would unprotected sex be any of their problem?
I feel like there's a reference I'm not getting.
Because Geico's insurance was for any harm suffered while in the car (where she caught HPV off the guy), and that is what they charged the guy for
The fundamental problem is that Geico didn't think about the terms of the insurance they were offering, seems like.
at first, it sounds like pure bullshit. like what the fuck does that have to do with his car insurance?
but when you consider the general liability clauses of your insurance policy, the fact that it happened in the car triggers the car insurance's liability.
It normally wouldn't be, but when you get sued and fail to fight it, you lose by default. The facts are a bit more complicated than that, but that is the TLDR reason for it.