Wright v. Blevins
380 S.W.3d 8
Mo. Ct. App.2012Background
- Plaintiff sought insurance coverage for a 2005 Cadillac and Ditto submitted an application to reinstate an expired policy, collecting $217 as initial premium and issuing a temporary insurance card.
- The temporary card reflected an incorrect policy number (054-95-F) compared to the correct 04-96-5 PPA-MO policy number, creating a discrepancy.
- On June 2, 2009, Plaintiff's $217 check was returned unpaid for insufficient funds, and on June 11, 2009 American Family cancelled the policy referencing the 96-5 PPA policy number.
- Plaintiff made no further attempts to tender payment after cancellations, and he concedes there is no coverage under the 96-5 PPA policy.
- On October 18, 2009 Plaintiff was involved in an automobile collision with Defendant; Plaintiff sued for personal injuries and for insurance coverage for property damage to the Cadillac.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to American Family, and a jury later found Plaintiff fully at fault with Defendant found 0% liable; the misstatement during closing argument prompted a jury-question response, which the court answered as described.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Plaintiff uninsured due to nonpayment and non-creation of coverage? | Payment is not a condition precedent. | Nonpayment voids the policy. | Summary judgment proper; Plaintiff uninsured. |
| Did the trial court err in answering the jury's question about the misstatement in closing? | Plaintiff was prejudiced by the answer. | No prejudice; response appropriate and limited. | No reversible error; Plaintiff not prejudiced. |
Key Cases Cited
- Blair by Snider v. Perry County Mut. Ins. Co., 118 S.W.3d 605 (Mo. banc 2003) (nonpayment can void insurance coverage)
- Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Flint, 837 S.W.2d 524 (Mo.App. W.D.1992) (temporary cards do not guarantee coverage without paid premium)
- Walters Auto Body Shop, Inc. v. Farmers Ins. Co., Inc., 829 S.W.2d 637 (Mo.App. W.D.1992) (premium payment is conditional until paid)
- Chailland v. M.F.A. Mut. Ins. Co., 375 S.W.2d 78 (Mo. banc. 1964) (oral contract elements require payment and policy terms)
- State v. Guinn, 58 S.W.3d 538 (Mo.App. W.D.2001) (jury questions require concrete accuracy in responses)