 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Swiss Reinsurance America Corp.9/14/2005
DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
This cause was heard upon the record in the trial court. Each error assigned has been reviewed and the following disposition is made:
{ } Appellants, Swiss Reinsurance America Corp., Inc. ("Swiss Re") and Frontier Insurance Co. ("Frontier"), appeal from the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas granting summary judgment in favor of Appellees. This Court affirms.
I.
{ } Frontier retained Appellee Tom Treadon to defend their insured, Dr. Thomas Robinson, in a medical malpractice action. Dr. Robinson was accused of failing to timely respond to a telephone call from a hospital emergency room reporting that one of his patients, a seven-and-one-half month pregnant woman, had been involved in an automobile accident. At the outset of his involvement, Mr. Treadon informed Frontier that he felt that the case was defensible, but that settlement in the range of $500,000 to $1,000,000 should be considered.
{ } As the litigation progressed, Mr. Treadon grew more confident in the case, noting that the plaintiffs' experts were not solid and that the defense experts made very good witnesses. In fact, the plaintiffs contacted Mr. Treadon to inform him that they intended to dismiss the action. Mr. Treadon agreed that he would not contest the dismissal without prejudice if the plaintiffs agreed that they would not replace their expert witnesses. When the case was refiled, the trial court determined that the plaintiffs could alter their experts witnesses, and the plaintiffs proceeded to retain new experts.
{ } As trial approached, Mr. Treadon repeatedly confronted Frontier, urging that the matter be settled. He informed Frontier that the plaintiffs' new expert witnesses were much stronger than the initial experts and that Dr. Robinson had a much greater exposure based on these new events. Throughout the course of the litigation (including the previously dismissed action), beginning in April of 1997, Dr. Robinson demanded that the matter be settled. Dr. Robinson believed that if the matter proceeded to trial and the jury returned a plaintiffs' verdict that he could suffer personal exposure because of the amount of the potential damage award. In fact, on April 8, 1997, his privately retained counsel wrote a letter to Frontier demanding that the matter be settled within the policy limits and threatening to bring a bad faith claim if the matter was not successfully resolved.
{ } Despite Mr. Treadon's advice and Dr. Robinson's requests, Frontier continued to urge that the matter be tried. This disagreement with Mr. Treadon was one of many that persisted throughout the litigation. Frontier continually questioned Mr. Treadon's billing statements and reporting habits. Frontier asserted that Mr. Treadon routinely failed to timely report on events in the litigation. In contrast, Mr. Treadon asserted that Frontier's requests were numerous and duplicative of prior information that he had provided. As a result of the friction between Mr. Treadon and Frontier and in response to the "bad faith" letter written by Dr. Robinson's private counsel, Frontier hired coverage counsel to evaluate the case. In addition, Frontier replaced Mr. Treadon as lead counsel shortly before the trial began.
{ } Mr. Treadon's replacement, Gary Goldwasser, concurred with Mr. Treadon's recommendation that the case should be settled for up to $2,000,000 before trial, but indicated that he felt that he could put forth a viable defense if necessary. Frontier, again, chose to go forward with trial against the recommendations of every party involved. After two days of trial, Frontier agreed to settle the matter and paid $2,200,000.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|