 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Geery v. Travelers Insurance Company2/13/2003
DECISION AND PARTIAL JUDGMENT DISMISSING CLAIM FOR COMPENSATION BENEFITS
Travelers previously moved for partial summary judgment dismissing claimant's request for compensation benefits. The motion was based on a settlement agreement and stipulation signed by claimant's attorney and Travelers' attorney. That agreement was then submitted to this Court in connection with a prior, then pending, petition seeking the same compensation benefits as sought in the present case. Pursuant to the agreement, this Court entered a judgment dismissing that prior petition. Geery v. Travelers Insurance Co., WCC No. 2000-0149, Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice (October 16, 2000).
Claimant in this action urges that his attorney did not have authority to execute the agreement and that the agreement and judgment are therefore void. Since Travelers' motion for partial summary judgment raised factual issues concerning the authority of claimant's attorney to execute the settlement and, secondarily, concerning possible ratification of the agreement by the claimant, I denied the motion and ordered an evidentiary hearing. Decision and Order Denying Motions to Compel and For Partial Summary Judgment (October 15, 2002).
An evidentiary hearing was held on October 25 and November 6, 2002, in Helena. Claimant represented himself. Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) was represented by Mr. Kelly M. Wills and Mr. Thomas J. Harrington. A transcript of the hearing has not been prepared.
Claimant and Mr. Howard Toole (Toole), who had represented claimant in the first action, testified. Exhibits 1 through 27 were admitted.
Having considered the testimony presented at trial, the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses, the exhibits, the deposition, and the arguments of the parties, the Court makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
On July 31, 2000, the claimant filed a Petition for Benefits with this Court. The petition was assigned docket number WCC No. 2000-0149. (Ex. 14 and Court File in WCC No. 2000-0149.)
In that petition the claimant alleged that on September 6, 1998, while working for Checker Auto Supply (Checker) of Missoula, Montana, he suffered a work-related aggravation of a previous back injury. He further alleged that Travelers insured Checkers at the time of the incident and that he was entitled to permanent partial and rehabilitation benefits.
The petition was prepared and filed by claimant's attorney, Mr. Howard Toole, who represented claimant throughout the subsequent proceedings in this Court. Claimant hired Toole in 1999 to represent him both with respect to his September 6, 1998 claim and another non-workers' compensation matter.
After being hired, and throughout his representation of claimant, Toole talked with claimant about his cases on numerous occasions. Those conversations were both by telephone and in person at Toole's office. Toole also copied claimant with at least some of his correspondence, including correspondence indicating a range of possible recovery (e.g., exs. 2 and 3), although claimant could not remember receiving some of the items that were sent to him. The specific communications and copies sent to claimant are not critical to my resolution of the present dispute, but it's fair to say that as a general matter Toole kept claimant informed about his cases and discussed the cases with him.
On August 25, 2000, Travelers filed a Response to Petition for Hearing. (Ex. 15 and Court File in WCC No. 2000-0149.) In its response, Travelers agreed that claimant had suffered an industrial injury as alleged in the petition and further stated t
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|