Automated Summary
Key Facts
Roger Clark sued his son Danny Clark and Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC for injuries sustained while unloading a generator at Danny's home in August 2009. The trial court confirmed a default judgment awarding $225,000 in general damages and $16,995 in special damages against both defendants. Great Lakes appealed, claiming it was not properly served with the lawsuit and that the judgment exceeded policy limits. The appellate court reversed the denial of the motion for new trial and vacated the default judgment in part because the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient evidence of the insurance policy terms and limits to establish the insurer's liability under La.R.S. 22:1269. The case was remanded for a new trial against Great Lakes.
Issues
- The court considered whether to grant Great Lakes' motion for new trial, finding the trial court erred in denying it. The judgment appeared contrary to law and evidence, particularly regarding service issues and the insufficient evidence of insurance coverage limits that exceeded the judgment amount. The court granted the motion for new trial under La.Code Civ.P. art. 1972 and 1973, and reversed the default judgment in part to the extent it cast judgment against the insurer.
- The court examined whether Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC received proper service of the lawsuit citation through the Secretary of State as required by Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1913(B). The record showed uncertainty about whether the judgment was properly served on the insurer, with the plaintiff's evidence conflicting about the service date and method. The court found that service of the petition was made on Great Lakes Reinsurance Company through the Secretary of State, but the insurer was listed as Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC in the declaration page submitted into evidence.
- The court analyzed whether the default judgment against Great Lakes was legally sound, noting the plaintiff only submitted a declaration page rather than the full insurance policy. The court found the evidence insufficient to establish coverage terms and limits, making the judgment against the insurer manifestly erroneous. The declaration page revealed policy limits less than the judgment amount, and the coverage disclosure summary required reference to the actual policy for complete terms.
Holdings
The Louisiana Court of Appeal reversed in part the trial court's denial of Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC's motion for new trial, granted the motion for new trial, reversed and vacated the default judgment in part against the insurer, and remanded for a new trial on the issue of Great Lakes' liability under the policy.
Remedies
- The matter is remanded for a limited new trial on the issue of the liability of Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC under the judgment and the extent thereof. The remainder of the default judgment relating to Danny Clark is left undisturbed.
- All costs of this proceeding are assessed against the plaintiff, Roger Clark, as a result of the appellate court's reversal and the granting of the new trial motion.
- The court granted the appellant's motion for new trial, reversing the trial court's denial of the motion. The motion was made peremptory pursuant to La.Code Civ.P. art. 1972, as the judgment appeared contrary to the law and evidence insofar as it cast Great Lakes in judgment absent the relevant policy.
- The default judgment dated February 8, 2010 was reversed and vacated to the extent that it entered judgment against the appellant, Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC. The court found the trial court was manifestly erroneous in entering judgment against the insurer without sufficient proof of coverage terms and limits.
Monetary Damages
241995.00
Legal Principles
- In default judgment proceedings against an insurance company, the plaintiff must submit the actual insurance policy to establish a prima facie case of coverage and liability. The terms and conditions of the insurance policy are part of the principal basis for claims and critical to establishing the insurer's liability. A declaration page alone is insufficient to impose liability against an insurer.
- Default judgments are reviewed under the manifest error standard, which is restricted to determining the sufficiency of the evidence offered in support of the judgment. This standard applies when reviewing default judgments entered in civil proceedings.
Precedent Name
- Succession of Rock v. Allstate Life Ins. Co.
- Arias v. Stolthaven New Orleans, L.L.C.
Cited Statute
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1702
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1972
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1973
- Louisiana Revised Statutes Section 22:1269
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1701
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1974
- Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure Article 1913
Judge Name
- Marc T. Amy
- Shannon J. Gremillion
- Phyllis M. Keaty
Passage Text
- The plaintiff submitted only a declaration page from the policy at issue and an attached policy coverage disclosure summary. The declaration page evidences a limit of liability in the amount of $100,000.00 for personal liability and medical payments in the amount of $500.00 per person and $2,500.00 per person. This document, alone, was insufficient to impose liability against the insurer.
- The record indicates that service of the petition was made on 'Great Lakes Reinsurance Company' through the Secretary of State. The insurer is listed as such in the plaintiff's petition even though the declarations page submitted by the plaintiff into evidence clearly bears the name: 'Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC.' Great Lakes appeared under this latter name at the time it filed its answer and its motion for new trial.
- We find that the trial court was manifestly erroneous in entering judgment against the insurer. We find that this error further warranted the granting of Great Lakes' motion for new trial, as discussed below.