Gay Bros. Fuel Service v. Travelers Indem. Co., No. 153-74
| Docket Nº | No. 153-74 |
| Citation | 332 A.2d 806, 133 Vt. 211 |
| Case Date | February 04, 1975 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Vermont |
Page 806
v.
The TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY
v.
FITTS AND OLSON.
Page 807
George W. Nostrand, Bellows Falls, for Gay Brothers Fuel service.
Miller & Hill, Rutland, for The Travelers Indemnity Co.
Robinson E. Keyes, Ryan, Smith & Carbine, Rutland, for Fitts and Olson.
Before BARNEY C. J., SMITH, KEYSER, DALEY, JJ., and SHANGRAW, C. J. (Ret.), Assigned.
KEYSER, Justice.
Leonard F. Bingham brought suit against Gay Brothers Fuel Service for injuries sustained in an automobile accident involving a Gay Brother's employee acting within the scope of his employment. Gay Brothers was provided with defense counsel by its insurer, the Travelers Indemnity Company, and the case proceeded to trial. Judgment was subsequently entered for Bingham for $82,016.00, an amount which exceeds Gay Brothers' insurance coverage by $32,016.00. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, for a new trial having been denied, a notice of appeal[133 Vt. 212] was filed. A docket number was assigned and the record on appeal was completed, but the appeal was later withdrawn.
Gay Brothers then brought a petition for declaratory judgment against Travelers. Count I of the petition charged that Travelers had continued the litigation after judgment without Gay Brothers' consent, that the liability limitation in the insurance policy was thereby invalidated under the provisions of 8 V.S.A. § 4203, and that Travelers was therefore bound to pay the entire amount of the judgment to Bingham. Count II of the petition prayed for the same relief on the basis of allegations that Travelers had not exercised good faith in settlement negotiations concerning the Bingham claim. Travelers answered by denial and filed a third party complaint against its counsel, Fitts and Olson. The complaint alleged that Fitts and Olson, as counsel in charge of the Bingham litigation, should be held liable to Travelers should Gay Brothers succeed in its action against them.
Gay Brothers moved for a summary judgment on the whole of Count I or, in the alternative, for an order specifying which facts were uncontroverted and therefore deemed established. The motion for summary judgment was denied on grounds that a genuine issue of fact existed as to whether Gay Brothers had, by stipulation or tacit consent, approved the taking of the appeal from Bingham's judgment and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Castle v. Sherburne Corp., No. 3-81
...be mindful of this Court's well-established policy of avoiding piecemeal appeals. Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975); Isabelle v. Proctor Hospital, 129 Vt. 500, 501, 282 A.2d 837, 838 (1971). Having thus identified the V.R.......
-
Pyramid Co. of Burlington, In re, No. 125-81
...Castle v. Sherburne Corp, supra, 141 Vt. at ---, 446 A.2d at 352 (citing Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975); Isabelle v. Proctor Hospital, 129 Vt. 500, 501, 282 A.2d 837, 838 (1971)). The trial court should have foreseen th......
-
Hill, In re, No. 87-581
...our policy against piecemeal review of any matter is strong and consistent. Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975). The policy has been enunciated with special clarity where discovery issues are involved. Castle v. Sherburne Co......
-
Castle v. Sherburne Corp., No. 3-81
...be mindful of this Court's well-established policy of avoiding piecemeal appeals. Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975); Isabelle v. Proctor Hospital, 129 Vt. 500, 501, 282 A.2d 837, 838 (1971). Having thus identified the V.R.......
-
Pyramid Co. of Burlington, In re, No. 125-81
...Castle v. Sherburne Corp, supra, 141 Vt. at ---, 446 A.2d at 352 (citing Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975); Isabelle v. Proctor Hospital, 129 Vt. 500, 501, 282 A.2d 837, 838 (1971)). The trial court should have foreseen th......
-
Hill, In re, No. 87-581
...our policy against piecemeal review of any matter is strong and consistent. Gay Brothers Fuel Service v. Travelers Indemnity Co., 133 Vt. 211, 212-13, 332 A.2d 806, 807-08 (1975). The policy has been enunciated with special clarity where discovery issues are involved. Castle v. Sherburne Co......