Martin v. AXIS Insurance Company
5:23-cv-00448
| E.D.N.C. | Jun 30, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Justin Blake Martin applied for insurance coverage with Axis Insurance (dba Ski Safe), responding "no" to questions regarding previous traffic tickets, accidents, or DUIs during a telephone application call.
- Axis subsequently determined that Martin's driving record and criminal history included multiple tickets and accidents in the five years prior to application, contrary to his representations during the application process.
- Axis relied on a policy exclusion voiding coverage ab initio for any concealment or misrepresentation relating to the insurance contract or application.
- Martin filed this lawsuit asserting breach of insurance contract, bad faith, and unfair/deceptive trade practices claims after Axis denied coverage.
- Axis counterclaimed seeking a declaratory judgment the policy was void based on Martin’s misrepresentation, and moved for judgment on the pleadings, which the court converted to a summary judgment motion when evidence outside the pleadings was considered.
- Plaintiff, now pro se after his attorney withdrew, failed to respond to the summary judgment evidence or update his address, leading to alternative grounds for dismissal for failure to prosecute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether policy void ab initio due to misrepresentation | Denied knowing concealment of driving record | Plaintiff misrepresented material facts on application | Policy void; Axis not obligated to cover |
| Whether Axis breached the insurance contract | Policy valid; denial of claim improper | No contract due to misrepresentation | No breach; Axis did not owe coverage |
| Whether Axis acted in bad faith or violated trade practices | Axis mishandled claim | No coverage; thus no bad faith or unfair practices | No valid contract; claims dismissed |
| Whether case should be dismissed for failure to prosecute | No response | Plaintiff failed to participate/update address | Dismissal with prejudice appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (motion for summary judgment requires more than a scintilla of evidence)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (movant’s initial burden in summary judgment)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (non-moving party must present specific facts at summary judgment)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (evidence viewed in light most favorable to nonmovant)
- Mayfield v. Nat'l Ass'n for Stock Car Auto Racing, Inc., 674 F.3d 369 (Rule 12(c) standard mirrors 12(b)(6))