2016 Ohio 1321
Ohio Ct. App.2016Background
- In 2006 Amankwah purchased full-coverage auto insurance (including collision) through agent Robert Walker for a Mercury Sable; later he added a Kia with full coverage.
- In April 2011 Amankwah replaced the Sable with a Volkswagen Passat by calling Walker’s office to “roll over” coverage; he later received renewal documents but did not read the declarations pages.
- Liberty Mutual’s file notes (and a branch manager affidavit) state that Amankwah declined collision coverage on the Passat during the April 18, 2011 call; Amankwah disputes that account in an affidavit.
- Liberty Mutual automatically debited monthly premiums from Amankwah’s bank account; Amankwah expected his premium to increase but testified he did not notice it actually decreased.
- In October 2013 Amankwah’s Passat was totaled ($14,000); Liberty Mutual denied collision coverage, and Amankwah sued for negligent procurement and contract reformation.
- The trial court granted summary judgment for Liberty Mutual; the appellate court affirmed, holding that reasonable minds can conclude only that Amankwah’s own negligence (failure to read the policy/declarations and monitor account charges) proximately caused his loss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negligent procurement: can insurer/agent be liable for failing to procure requested coverage? | Amankwah: agent failed to procure collision coverage and his failure to read the policy is a comparative-negligence issue for the jury. | Liberty Mut.: contemporaneous notes show Amankwah declined collision; Kincaid and related authority support restricting claims when insured fails to review policy. | Court: Summary judgment for Liberty Mut.; Amankwah’s negligence in failing to review policy/declarations and monitor premiums was sole proximate cause. |
| Contract reformation based on mutual or unilateral mistake | Amankwah: policy should be reformed to reflect the parties’ agreement to provide collision coverage. | Liberty Mut.: no basis for reformation; equitable relief barred where claimant failed to read the contract and loss results from claimant’s negligence. | Court: Reformation denied; equitable reformation unavailable where loss was caused by claimant’s negligence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Temple v. Wean United, Inc., 50 Ohio St.2d 317 (summary-judgment standard) (Ohio) (sets the standard applied on summary judgment review)
- Damon’s Missouri, Inc. v. Davis, 63 Ohio St.3d 605 (recognizes negligent-procurement claim against insurance agents) (Ohio)
- Kincaid v. Erie Ins. Co., 128 Ohio St.3d 322 (discusses insured’s duty to examine coverage and standing principles) (Ohio)
- Robson v. Quentin E. Cadd Agency, 179 Ohio App.3d 298 (addresses whether failure to read policy is a comparative-negligence issue) (Ohio App.)
- Snedegar v. Midwestern Indemn. Co., 44 Ohio App.3d 64 (explains reformation for mutual or unilateral mistake and equitable limitations) (Ohio App.)