« Ind. Law - Indiana Voter ID Law topic in Nebraska | Main | Ind. Gov't. - Texting ban; school vouchers »

Tuesday, March 01, 2011

Ind. Decisions - Court of Appeals issues 2 today (and 4 NFP)

For publication opinions today (2):

In Auto-Owners Insurance Company v. Gary Hughes , an 11-page opinion, Judge Bradford writes:

Appellant/Defendant Auto-Owners Insurance Company appeals following the entry of judgment in favor of Appellee/Plaintiff Gary Hughes on his contract claim in the amount of $166,792.83. Auto-Owners contends, inter alia, that the trial court erred in denying its summary judgment motion on the basis that Hughes's suit was barred by a one-year limitation in the relevant insurance policy. We reverse and remand with instructions. * * *

The question before us today is whether principles of equity and fairness create a limited duty to provide a copy of an insurance policy when the insured has requested one following a loss such that failure to discharge that duty would prevent an insurance company from asserting noncompliance with policy terms as a defense in subsequent litigation. We have little trouble answering in the affirmative, as has every other court that has addressed this question. * * *

We therefore conclude that, following a loss, an insurer must provide a copy of an insurance policy to the insured upon request or be estopped from raising noncompliance with policy terms as a defense in subsequent litigation. * * *

Hughes has failed to establish that a genuine issue exists as to whether Auto-Owners discharged its duty to provide him or his agent with a copy of the Policy upon request. Consequently, the trial court erred in denying Auto-Owners's second summary judgment motion on the basis that Hughes failed to bring suit within one year of the loss, as required by the Policy. We reverse and remand with instructions to enter summary judgment in favor of Auto-Owners.

In James and Nancy Taylor v,. Ford Motor Co., et al. , a 12-page opinion, Judge Mathias writes:
James and Nancy Taylor filed a negligence claim in Marion Superior Court against Arthur Adams (“Adams”), Automotive Components Holdings, LLC (“ACH”), and Ford Motor Company (“Ford”) (collectively “the Defendants”). The trial court subsequently granted the Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Taylors appeal and argue that the trial court did have subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
NFP civil opinions today (2):

A.K. and Jeffry G. Price v. K.K. (NFP)

Denise Tinsley v. Marion T., LLC, et al. (NFP)

NFP criminal opinions today (2):

Tyson G. Keplinger v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Barry L. Johnson v. State of Indiana (NFP)

Posted by Marcia Oddi on March 1, 2011 12:26 PM
Posted to Ind. App.Ct. Decisions