 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
SOUTHERN AMERICAN INS. v. GABBERT-JONES3/10/1989
This is a declaratory judgment action that raises the question whether under a certain excess liability insurance policy there is an enforceable obligation of the insurer to pay punitive damages awarded against the insured. Otherwise put, the question is whether the subject policy provides coverage to the insured for punitive damages awarded in a bodily injury negligence action.
It seems that on May 8, 1984, James Codner was in the employ of defendant Gabbert-Jones, Inc., (Gabbert) a corporate entity. He was a swamper, that is, a truck driver's assistant or an assistant truck driver, if there is a difference. While driving a Gabbert truck that day, Codner was involved in a multi-vehicle accident. Albert A. Jansen sustained bodily injury. We infer that he was the driver or an occupant of the other, or one of the other, vehicles. Jansen prosecuted a negligence action against Gabbert, Daniel Eakes, and Mid-Plains Construction, Inc. Nothing in the record before us indicates that Codner was a party defendant. We cannot tell or confidently infer what Eakes or Mid-Plains Construction, Inc., had to do with Jansen's claim.
Jansen's case was tried to a jury. Pursuant to K.S.A. 60-258a(b), the jury returned these special verdicts:
"1. Do you find any of the parties to be at fault?
"Answer: Yes X No __
"2. hat percentage of the total fault is attributable to each of the following persons?
(A) Albert A. Jansen 0%
(B) Gabbert-Jones, Inc. 100%
(C) Mid-Plains Construction, Inc. 0%
100%
"3. . . . .
hat total amount of damages do you find was sustained by the following party:
(A) Albert A. Jansen $2,190,000.00
"4. What amount of punitive damages, if any, do you award? $ 700,000.00" On those verdicts, the trial court entered "judgment against [Gabbert] in the amount of $2,190,000 actual damages and in the amount of $700,000 punitive damages for a total judgment in the amount of $2,890,000."
At the time of the accident, there was in full force and effect a "Commercial Umbrella Liability Insurance Policy," an excess policy, issued by plaintiff Southern American Insurance Company (Southern) to Gabbert effective July 1, 1983, for a one-year term. The operative language of the policy's insuring clause, or indemnity agreement, is this:
"[Southern] grees . . . o pay on behalf of [Gabbert] for ultimate net loss . . . which [Gabbert] may sustain by reason of liability imposed upon [Gabbert] by law . . . or damages . . . because of [bodily injury] . . . caused by an [accident]. . . .
. . . .
"`Ultimate net loss' means . . . all sums which [Gabbert] . . . is legally obligated to pay as damages . . . by reason of adjudication. . . ." (Emphasis added.) We are not persuaded that the additional words "because of personal injury . . . liability to which this policy applies" appearing in the policy definition of "ultimate net loss" add anything now material.
The policy contains neither an express exclusion nor an express inclusion of punitive damages. None of the policy's express exclusions is presently pertinent.
By prosecution of this case, Southern has sought a judicial determination that under its policy it is not responsible for payment of the punitive damages part of the Jansen judgment
entered against Gabbert. The trial court held in favor of Southern and Gabbert appeals.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Kansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|