976 N.E.2d 716
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- Kern sustained injuries in a 2006 collision with Steady; Kern sued Steady; State Farm intervened as subrogee under UM/UIM coverage; jury verdict: Steady 100% at fault, damages $98,000; trial court entered judgment for Kern in the amount of $98,000 plus costs and interest; Steady’s insurer paid $25,000 policy limit and $6,334.79 for medical costs/interest, and State Farm paid $68,000 plus $5,000 earlier for medical costs; Steady moved to deem judgment satisfied, which the trial court granted; State Farm sought review on standing and the deeming-satisfied ruling; the appellate court reverses and remands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to appeal by insurer | State Farm has subrogation rights and suffered injury from judgment being deemed satisfied | Steady contends State Farm was not a party when judgment entered | State Farm has standing to appeal |
| Judgment satisfaction where insurer pays underinsured benefits | Insurer’s UM/UIM payment does not satisfy the judgment against the tortfeasor | Judgment should be satisfied by insured’s recovery from third party or insurer | Judgment not satisfied; insurer subrogation rights allow pursuit of judgment; reversal and remand warranted |
Key Cases Cited
- Pence v. State, 652 N.E.2d 486 (Ind. 1995) (standing and right to enforce claims explained)
- Indiana Civil Rights Comm’n v. Indianapolis Newspapers, 716 N.E.2d 943 (Ind. 1999) (standing and injury requirement explained)
- TacCo Falcon Point, Inc. v. Atlantic Ltd. P’ship XII, 937 N.E.2d 1212 (Ind. Ct. App. 2010) (abuse of discretion standard for relief from judgment)
- Dillard v. Dillard, 889 N.E.2d 28 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (burden on movant to show necessity and justice for relief)
- Peele v. Gillespie, 658 N.E.2d 954 (Ind. Ct. App. 1995) (underinsured payment not automatically reduce third-party judgment; subrogation policy considerations)