Ehlert v. Western Nat. Mut. Ins. Co.

• Decision Date: 11 May 1973
• Docket Number: No. 43665,43665
• Citation: Ehlert v. Western Nat. Mut. Ins. Co., 207 N.W.2d 334, 296 Minn. 195 (Minn. 1973)
• Parties: Terryl Lynn EHLERT, a Minor, by Melvin E. Ehlert, Her Father and Natural Guardian, and Melvin E. Ehlert, Individually, Respondent, v. WESTERN NATIONAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 334

207 N.W.2d 334

296 Minn. 195

Terryl Lynn EHLERT, a Minor, by Melvin E. Ehlert, Her Father and Natural Guardian, and Melvin E. Ehlert Individually, Respondent, v. WESTERN NATIONAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant.

No. 43665.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

May 11, 1973.

Syllabus by the Court

Where the parties have submitted questions of both law and fact to an arbitrator and no motion has been made under Minn.St. 572.19 or 572.20 to vacate, modify, or correct the arbitrator's award, the parties are bound by the award and, upon application by a party, the court properly confirmed the award and entered judgment thereon.

Cummins, Gislason, Sheahan, Joyce & McHaffie, and Richard T. McHaffie, David W. Nord, St. Paul, for appellant.

Rider, Bennett, Egan, Johnson & Arundel, David F. Fitzgerald and Wright S. Walling, Minneapolis, amicus curiae.

DeParcq, Anderson, perl & Hunegs and James R. Schwebel, Minneapolis, for respondent.

Heard and considered en banc.

KNUTSON, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court confirming an arbitration award.

We have been supplied with no record, so the facts are taken from the briefs of the parties. There seems to be no dispute as to the relevant facts.

Terryl Lynn Ehlert is a daughter of Melvin E. Ehlert and resided in his household. On July 11, 1970, Terryl Lynn was a passenger in an automobile owned by Harry Hanson and operated by Michelle Ehlert when the automobile left the road and collided with a tree, causing serious injuries to Terryl Lynn.

The Hanson automobile was insured by Auto Owners Insurance Company. The insurer denied coverage on the grounds that Michelle Ehlert did not have the requisite permission of the named insured. This brought into play the uninsured-motorist coverage provisions in separate endorsements under a policy owned by Melvin E. Ehlert. He was the owner of three cars, each of which was insured by Western National Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter Western) under separate endorsements in a policy containing uninsured-motorist coverage.

Ehlert demanded arbitration pursuant to provisions in the policy. Western moved to stay the arbitration until legal issues involved could be determined, which motion was denied by the district court. Ehlert's motion that the parties proceed with arbitration was granted. Thereafter, the arbitrator proceeded with the arbitration and on October 14, 1971, found in favor of Ehlert, awarding damages in the total amount of $26,533.50 as the amount due under the uninsured-motorist coverage of the endorsements issued by Western. No appeal was taken from the award of the arbitrator. On January 18, 1972, Ehlert moved, pursuant to Minn.St. 572.18 and 572.21, for an order confirming the arbitration award and for the entry of judgment in accordance therewith. The motion was granted by a judge of the district court on February 3, 1972, and judgment was entered on February 15. Western appeals from that judgment.

While we have no record of the proceedings before the arbitrator, it is apparent that one of the issues submitted to arbitration by both sides of the case was whether Ehlert was entitled to recovery under all three endorsements or was limited to recovery in the amount of $10,000. The arbitrator determined Ehlert could recover under all three endorsements, which is in harmony with our decisions in Van Tassel v. Horace Mann Ins. Co., Minn., 207 N.W.2d 348 (filed herewith), and Pleitgen v. Farmers Ins. Exchange, Minn., 207 N.W.2d 535 (filed herewith), which are being released at the same time as this opinion.

Assuming the question could have been brought before this court at this time, the legal issue as to whether Western is liable to the full extent of damages within the limits of the three endorsements has been decided in Van Tassel and Pleitgen. We are satisfied, therefore, that the only question before us in this case is the finality of the award of the arbitrator. For the purposes of this appeal it must be assumed that Hanson was an uninsured motorist within the meaning of the policy issued to Ehlert. ¹

There can be little doubt that the parties both submitted to the arbitrator the question whether recovery could be had under all three endorsements or whether it is limited to the coverage in one. In other words, the question of so-called 'stacking' of the endorsements was submitted and was determined by the arbitrator. Each party submitted a lengthy memorandum of the law after the controversy had been heard by the arbitrator. In the first paragraph of its memorandum, Western states:

'The question for the Arbitrator to consider...