Robert Charles Justus v. William & Donna Morgan
47196-5
| Wash. Ct. App. | Jun 27, 2017Background
- On June 9, 2010 William Morgan shot at a truck containing Joseph Tobeck and Robert Justus; Tobeck died and Justus was injured. William confronted them with a handgun after seeing metal pipes he claimed were his.
- Plaintiffs (Tobeck’s estate and Justus) sued the Morgans; Justus’s complaint (filed June 27, 2012) alleged negligent/reckless acts including firing at the vehicle, wrongful detention, and preventing aid.
- State Farm defended the Morgans under reservation of rights and separately filed a declaratory-judgment action contesting coverage.
- Justus and the Morgans entered a covenant-judgment settlement: stipulate to a $1.3M judgment, Justus covenants not to execute, and the Morgans assign their claims against State Farm to Justus; trial court reduced award to $818,900 after finding the settlement reasonable under Chaussee factors.
- State Farm intervened to oppose reasonableness, arguing Justus’s theories were either barred by the two-year statute for intentional torts or legally impermissible, so settlement was unreasonable.
- The trial court weighed all Chaussee factors, found Justus might have viable negligence theories (three-year statute), found the Morgans had no plausible defenses, and concluded the covenant settlement was reasonable; State Farm appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused discretion approving the covenant-judgment settlement | Justus: court reasonably weighed Chaussee factors and plausibly found negligence theories viable | State Farm: court should have conclusively rejected liability theories barred as intentional torts/time-barred | Court: No abuse — trial court need only make a reasonable (not conclusive) assessment of liability and defenses when weighing Chaussee factors |
| Whether the court’s factual comments (portraying William’s conduct as intentional/outrageous) undermine its reasonableness determination | Justus: comments did not decide intentional vs negligent and court expressly declined to resolve that issue | State Farm: comments show court viewed claims as intentional, which would be time-barred | Court: Comments do not undermine ruling because it repeatedly disclaimed deciding intent and assessed viability of negligence theories |
| Whether the court erred in concluding Morgans were denied indemnity coverage by State Farm (impacting bad-faith/collusion analysis) | Justus: bad faith/collusion not shown; State Farm doesn’t challenge Chaussee bad-faith analysis on appeal | State Farm: court erred in finding State Farm denied indemnity and thereby influenced Chaussee analysis | Court: Declines to review this factual finding because State Farm disclaimed challenging the court’s bad-faith/collusion conclusion on appeal |
| Whether other Chaussee factors were properly considered (e.g., damages, ability to pay, risk of litigation) | Justus: trial court comprehensively analyzed all Chaussee factors supporting reasonableness | State Farm: focused challenge only on liability/time-bar issues | Court: Trial court properly weighed all factors; overall decision was not manifestly unreasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Martin v. Johnson, 141 Wn. App. 611 (2007) (trial court need not conclusively decide complex statutory liability to approve covenant settlement)
- Bird v. Best Plumbing Grp., LLC, 175 Wn.2d 756 (2012) (trial court may assess viability of a damages-enhancing statute without finally construing it when approving a covenant judgment)
- Water’s Edge Homeowners Ass’n v. Water’s Edge Assocs., 152 Wn. App. 572 (2009) (standard of review: abuse of discretion for covenant-judgment settlement reasonableness)
- Glover v. Tacoma Gen. Hosp., 98 Wn.2d 708 (1983) (framework for factors relevant to settlement assessments referenced in Chaussee)
- Schooley v. Pinch’s Deli Mkt., Inc., 80 Wn. App. 862 (1996) (recognition that negligence theories can support liability even absent a previously delineated negligent-detention tort)