993 F.3d 1068
8th Cir.2021Background
- American Modern insured the Thomases for an apartment; a January 2014 fire destroyed their home and they submitted a personal-property claim.
- American Modern concluded the fire was intentionally set, denied coverage, and (over two years later) sued the Thomases for declaratory relief; the Thomases counterclaimed for vexatious refusal to pay.
- At trial the jury found for the Thomases; American Modern appealed, raising four alleged trial errors.
- Key trial disputes: exclusion of Aaron Thomas’s 2017 felony convictions (statutory rape and sodomy) offered for impeachment; the jury instruction defining “material”; a supplemental jury instruction clarifying that delay can constitute vexatious refusal to pay; and exclusion of an expert (Carl Welcher) as untimely and cumulative.
- The Eighth Circuit held the exclusion of the prior convictions was erroneous (requiring reversal and remand) but upheld the district court on the instructions and the expert exclusion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (American Modern) | Defendant's Argument (Thomases) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Exclusion of Aaron Thomas’s prior felonies for impeachment | Convictions are admissible impeachment evidence and probative of credibility | Highly prejudicial, would confuse jury, not essential because other evidence supports Thomases | District court erred to exclude; credibility was paramount and convictions were highly probative — reversal |
| Jury instruction defining “material” | Instruction misstated Missouri law; should use a looser “some bearing on the subject matter” standard | Instruction usefully relied on fraudulent-application precedent and was acceptable given Missouri authority gaps | No abuse of discretion; district court’s definition permissible under Missouri law analogues |
| Supplemental instruction on vexatious refusal (clarifying delay counts) | Supplemental instruction was unnecessary, beyond scope of question, and prejudicial | Jury requested clarification; district court’s corrective instruction was appropriate | No abuse of discretion; answer was within scope, accurate, neutral, necessary, and not prejudicial |
| Exclusion of expert (Carl Welcher) | Excluding Welcher prevented presentation of expert cause/origin evidence | Testimony was untimely disclosed and cumulative of Fire Marshal Bruno’s testimony | No abuse of discretion; exclusion for untimeliness and cumulative nature was proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Cummings v. Malone, 995 F.2d 817 (8th Cir. 1993) (admission of felony convictions for impeachment where credibility paramount)
- Weems v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 665 F.3d 958 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review for evidentiary rulings)
- Walker v. Kane, 885 F.3d 535 (8th Cir. 2018) (credibility not always dispositive; review of exclusion rulings)
- Grain Land Coop. v. Kar Kim Farms, Inc., 199 F.3d 983 (8th Cir. 1999) (abuse-of-discretion review for jury instructions)
- Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. v. Scott, 486 F.3d 418 (8th Cir. 2007) (misrepresentation may void coverage)
- Trost v. Trek Bicycle Corp., 162 F.3d 1004 (8th Cir. 1998) (courts may exclude untimely evidence absent harmlessness or justification)
- DeWitt v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., 667 S.W.2d 700 (Mo. banc 1984) (Missouri recognizes delay can support vexatious-refusal finding)
- Bollenbach v. United States, 326 U.S. 607 (U.S. 1946) (trial judge should clear explicit jury difficulties)