She Could Not Collect On a Secondary Insurance Policy Because the Primary Insurance Policy Was Not Exhausted
In Bardsley v. Government Employees Insurance Co., the supreme court held that Bardsley could not recover under a secondary insurance policy when she had not exhausted the primary insurance policy.
While driving 85 to 96 miles in a 35 mile-per-hour speed zone, John Ludwig drove his employer’s Maserati off the road and into the Bardsley’s home. The vehicle crashed into the rear of the house and the airborne vehicle struck Frederic Bardsley, killing him instantly. The vehicle continued through the house and came to rest in the front yard. Continue reading
In Bennett & Bennett Construction, Inc. v. Auto Owners Insurance Company, the supreme court reversed a circuit court’s determination that exclusions in an insurance contract did not apply.
Homeowner hired Bennett & Bennett Construction, Inc. (Bennett & Bennett) as general contractor to remove synthetic stucco cladding from her home and replace it with a decorative brick face. Bennett & Bennett hired M&M Construction of the Carolinas, LLC (M&M) to install the brick. M&M completed the work and informed Bennett & Bennett. Upon inspection, Bennett & Bennett noticed some problems that M&M needed to fix and directed M&M to do so. Continue reading
Although the Insurer Was Not Notified by the Special Referee of Its Contractual Rights Being Changed, It Does Not Matter Because the Insurer Lacks Standing to Challenge the Special Referee’s Unilateral Action
In Narruhn v. Alea London Limited, the supreme court held that Alea London Limited lacked standing to raise a Rule 60(b) motion to set aside a special referee’s assignment of rights to permit Narruhn to raise claims against Alea London Limited directly.
Narruhn was shot while at The Red Room, a nightclub in Myrtle Beach. She filed suit seeking damages from RKC Entertainment the owner of The Red Room, and she won the suit. A special referee was appointed to determine if whether The Red Room could satisfy the judgment. The special referee granted Narruhn an assignment of “any and all rights, including any claims, that [The Red Room] might have against Insurer, who had previously issued a liability insurance policy to [RKC Entertainment] for The Red Room.” Continue reading
In Hutchinson v. Liberty Life Insurance Company, the supreme court held that methamphetamine is not a narcotic under the life insurance contract.
Decedent, a long-distance truck driver, died in a one-truck accident. The death certificate named “blunt chest trauma with motor vehicle crash” as the underlying cause of death, but also listed methamphetamine use as a contributing clause. The autopsy report was positive for methamphetamine and amphetamine but not for narcotics. Continue reading