 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Meas v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.11/22/2005
Sarith Meas appeals the trial court's entry of summary judgment against him. Meas was injured in a motor vehicle accident by a third party and received collision damages under his insurance policy with State Farm Fire and Casualty Company. Meas then sought to recover both property and personal injury damages from the tortfeasor; but State Farm, acting under a provision of Meas's insurance policy involving collision loss, recovered its property damage payment directly from the tortfeasor's insurance company before Meas had settled his personal injury claim.
We hold that State Farm had a classic subrogation right to recover damages from the tortfeasor's insurer for property damages it paid to Meas; that the contract provision allowing this recovery has been expressly approved by our Supreme Court; that the subrogation right can be exercised before the issue of personal injury is resolved and is not dependent upon the policyholder being made whole for his personal injury loss; and that Meas was not entitled to a pro rata share of attorney fees attributable to the property damage. We affirm.
I. Facts
On February 19, 2002, Meas's vehicle was damaged in a collision caused by another driver, Quoc To. Meas was insured by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company. The vehicle To was driving was insured by Allied Insurance Company.
Meas's collision coverage provided no-fault coverage for collision-caused damage to his car. His coverage was subject to the following condition ('condition d'):
3. Our Right to Recover Our Payments
d. Under all other coverages, the right of recovery of any party we pay passes to us. Such party shall:
(1) not hurt our rights to recover; and
(2) help us get our money back.
Our right to recover our payments applies only after the insured has been fully compensated for the bodily injury, property damage or loss.
Clerk's Papers (CP) at 156-57.
On March 13, 2002, Meas informed State Farm by letter that he intended to pursue from Allied 'any State Farm subrogation claims, including for medical costs, property damage or other non-medical expenses paid under the Meas {sic} first party coverage.' CP at 118. On May 1, 2002, State Farm paid Meas's repair costs less a $250 deductible, totaling $2,247.73.
State Farm then requested reimbursement directly from Allied for the collision benefits paid on Meas's behalf. On May 8, 2002, Allied reimbursed State Farm for the full amount of the collision payment, as well as Meas's $250 deductible, totaling $2,747.73. State Farm returned the deductible to Meas.
The following year, on February 26, 2003, Meas sent a settlement proposal to Allied, seeking $6,000 in general damages, $2,399 in medical bills, and $2,409.03 in property loss. Allied responded that it would settle Meas's personal injury claims but that it had already reimbursed State Farm for his property damage.
In April 2003, Meas wrote State Farm, demanding that it either return the collision damage payment to Allied or tender the payment to him until his claims against Allied were settled. He argued that State Farm '{did} not have the ability to directly collect Mr. Meas's property loss damages from the tortfeasor, or the tortfeasor's insurance carrier' under Mahler v. Szucs, 135 Wn.2d 398, 957 P.2d 632, 966 P.2d 305 (1998). CP at 169-70. State Farm responded that Mahler was inapposite to Meas's case; but if Allied's policy limits and Meas's uninsured motorist coverage (UIM) were insufficient to leave Meas whole, it would give further consideration to his request. Meas did not respond. In December 2003, Meas set
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|