 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Richardson v11/7/2003
Ashli Richardson appeals a judgment granting a motion for summary judgment filed by United States Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Company (USF&G; and dismissing her claims for uninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) insurance coverage under policies issued to the Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government (the parish). The only issue on appeal is whether UM rejections executed by the parish were valid. After a de novo review, we find that USF&G;failed to carry its burden of proof that there is no genuine issue of material fact concerning the validity of the UM rejections in this case. Accordingly, we reverse and remand.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Ashli Richardson, Karl M. Beattie, and Bobbie G. O'Bryan, Jr., who were all police officers for the city of Houma, were involved in an automobile accident on November 24, 1998, while in the course and scope of their employment. They were occupying a police vehicle and were proceeding through an intersection under a green light when they were hit by a pickup truck driven by Bobby G. Lott, Jr., owned by Bobby G. Lott, Sr., and insured by State farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (State farm). As a result of the accident, Ms. Richardson was severely injured; Officers Beattie and O'Bryan sustained only minor injuries. All were paid workers' compensation benefits by the parish. Suit was fled against the Lofts and State Farm; the parish was named as a necessary and indispensable party because of its potential subrogation claims for workers' compensation payments, and because the State Farm liability limits might be insufficient to cover those claims and the damages sustained by the three officers, particularly Ms. Richardson. The petition further alleged that the parish might be insured by USF&G; but did not name it as a defendant.
After some discovery, an amended petition added USF&G;as a defendant, alleging its liability insurance policies, which were renewed July 1, 1998, insured the parish and that the city of Houma police department was an additional insured on those policies, entitling the officers to UM coverage. The amended petition further stated that there was no rejection of UM coverage when the policies were issued and that UM rejection forms signed in October 1998 were not valid.
USF&G;eventually filed a motion for summary judgment, stating there were no genuine issues of material fact and, as a matter of law, the parish having effectively rejected UM coverage, the USF&G;policies did not provide UM insurance at the time of this accident. In support of its motion, among other things, USF&G;submitted affidavits; copies of its policies; the deposition of Barry P. Bonvillain, parish council president at all relevant times; a copy of a resolution adopted by the parish council on March 11, 1992, authorizing the council president to reject UM coverage on all parish insurance policies; and copies of various UM rejection loans from 1993 to 2001. The documents and accompanying affidavits showed that effective July 1, 1998, USF&G;had replaced two existing policies with substitute policies providing liability insurance to the parish and the city of Houma police department. UM rejection forms had been signed in January 1996 on the previous policies. The two policies in effect at the time of the accident were a commercial liability umbrella policy (the umbrella policy) and an excess automobile liability policy (the excess policy). Although UM rejection forms were not executed when these policies became effective in July 1998, they were executed for both policies by Mr. Bonvillain a month before the accident, on October 20, 1998.
USF&G;argued that the evidence establishe
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Louisiana Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|