Schindler v. UNITED SERVICES AUTO. ASS'N
2011 MT 129
| Mont. | 2011Background
- Greg Schindler obtained a homeowner policy from USAA after Provident force-placed insurance; discrepancies between the policy description and the house’s actual structure came to light.
- The house suffered a July 29, 2008 fire; USAA investigated and determined the policy would not cover losses due to alleged fraud in Greg’s application.
- USAA concluded Greg misrepresented residence type and housing configuration (six kitchens/bathrooms, multi-unit use) during the application, affecting underwriting.
- USAA advanced funds to discharge Schindlers’ mortgage and paid Greg for losses while the claim was under investigation.
- Schindlers sued USAA for breach of contract and bad faith, then equitable estoppel; trial occurred in June 2010 with a verdict for USAA on breach/fair dealing but finding Greg committed fraud; post-trial motions addressed transcript costs and evidentiary rulings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equitable estoppel against USAA based on §33-1-501 violation | Schindlers: USAA should be estopped due to unapproved form | USAA: estoppel not appropriate; facts show possible fraud materiality | affirmed denial of summary judgment; material facts remained |
| Admissibility of screen shots vs. Williams testimony | Exclude all screen-shot evidence under §33-1-501 | Admit Williams’ recollection as non-hearsay admissions | District Court did not abuse; Williams testimony allowed, screen shots excluded |
| Preclusion of fraud evidence under §33-15-403 | Fraud defense cannot be used if screen shots excluded | Fraud defense permissible via Williams’ testimony | District Court did not abuse; allowed §33-15-403 defense through testimony |
| Need for additional transcripts on appeal | Record insufficient to rule on issues | Transcript costs properly ordered to ensure review | District Court did not abuse; transcripts ordered |
Key Cases Cited
- Avanta Fed. Credit Union v. Shupak, 223 P.3d 863 (Mont. 2009) (equitable relief requires clean hands; estoppel analysis concerns material facts)
- Kauffman-Harmon v. Kauffman, 36 P.3d 408 (Mont. 2001) (equitable relief requires fair dealing and no gross injustice)
- Williams v. Union Fid. Life Ins. Co., 123 P.3d 213 (Mont. 2005) (standard for summary judgment and evidentiary rulings in insurance disputes)
- Jacobsen v. Allstate Ins. Co., 215 P.3d 649 (Mont. 2009) (abuse of discretion standard for in limine rulings)
- Heidt v. Argani, 214 P.3d 1255 (Mont. 2009) (appellate review of transcript-related decisions)
- Rice v. C.I. Lanning, 97 P.3d 580 (Mont. 2004) (evidence admissibility and relevance standards)