N. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Stucky

Decision Date13 November 2014
Docket NumberNo. OP 14–0016.,OP 14–0016.
CourtMontana Supreme Court
PartiesNORTH PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff and Defender, v. Calvin STUCKY, Renee Stucky, Sadee Stucky, and Callie Jo Stucky, Defendants and Plaintiffs.

For Plaintiff: Jesse Beaudette, John E. Bohyer, Bohyer, Erickson, Beaudette & Tranel, P.C.; Missoula, Montana.

For Defendants: Lori A. Harshbarger, JD Law Firm, P.C.; Whitehall, Montana.

For Amicus Montana Trial Lawyers Association: Jonathan McDonald, Hunt & McDonald Law Firm; Helena, Montana Anders Blewett, Hoyt & Blewett, PLLC; Great Falls, Montana.

Opinion

Justice MICHAEL E. WHEAT delivered the Opinion of the Court.

¶ 1 The United States District Court for the District of Montana, Missoula Division, the Honorable Dana L. Christensen presiding, has certified the following questions to this Court:

1. Does Montana law recognize a claim for loss of consortium by the adult child of an injured parent?
2. If Montana recognizes a claim for loss of consortium by the adult child of an injured parent, what evidentiary standard must the plaintiff meet in order to assert such a claim?

¶ 2 We accepted the certified questions and now answer that Montana law recognizes a claim for loss of consortium by the adult child of an injured parent, and that to assert such a claim, the plaintiff must show that (1) a third party tortiously caused the parent to suffer a serious, permanent and disabling mental or physical injury compensable under Montana law, and (2) the parent's ultimate condition of mental or physical impairment is so overwhelming and severe that it has caused the parent-child relationship to be destroyed or nearly destroyed. Relevant to establishing the plaintiff's cause of action, and to a jury's determination of damages, will be evidence of the severity of injury to the parent; the actual effect that the parent's injury has had on the relationship and is likely to have in the future; the child's age; the nature of the child's relationship with the parent; and the child's emotional, physical and geographic characteristics.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

¶ 3 The parties have stipulated to the following pertinent facts, set forth in the U.S. District Court's certification order.

¶ 4 On August 12, 2009, Calvin Stucky (Calvin) was injured in a motor vehicle accident in Powell County on Highway 141, when a vehicle headed in the opposite direction crossed the center line and collided head-on with his Ford truck. As a result of this collision, he sustained significant injuries with extensive physical and emotional effects. At the time of the collision, his daughters, Sadee and Callie Jo, were eighteen and fifteen, respectively.

¶ 5 North Pacific Insurance Company (NPIC) issued a Commercial Auto Policy (the Policy) to Earl Stucky and Glenna Stucky. The policy period at issue was from October 24, 2008, to October 24, 2009. The Policy names Calvin and his wife, Renee Stucky (Renee), as insureds under the Policy. Calvin purchased a 1980 Ford truck on or about May 27, 2009. NPIC alleges that the 1980 Ford truck was never added to the Policy for insurance coverage. Calvin alleges that he did request the 1980 Ford truck to be added to the Policy.

¶ 6 The Policy provides Under Insured Motorist (UIM) coverage in pertinent part as follows:

We will pay all sums the “insured” is legally entitled to recover as compensatory damages from the owner or driver of an “underinsured motor vehicle.” The damages must result from “bodily injury” sustained by the “insured” caused by an “accident.” The owner's or driver's liability for these damages must result from the ownership, maintenance, or use of the “underinsured motor vehicle.”

The Policy provides that an “insured” includes any “family members” of an individual who is a named insured. A “family member” is defined as “ a person related to an individual Named Insured by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident of such Named Insured's household, including a ward or foster child.” Renee, Sadee and Callie Jo allege they are insureds under the Policy and are entitled to UIM benefits as a result of Calvin's accident.

¶ 7 Calvin was the only person occupying the 1980 Ford truck when the accident took place. His injuries from the accident are extensive and include: Traumatic brain injury (TBI)/closed head injury with executive level deficits and emotional dyscontrol; left acetabular fracture, sacroiliac joint disruption, S/P ORIF (open reduction internal fixation); left hip sciatic nerve entrapment secondary to left acetabular fracture and sacroiliac joint disruption; T10 vertebral fracture, S/P T8–T12 fixation; left hip extensive heterotopic ossification requiring surgical excision; mood disorder; loss of cognitive function; left lower extremity impairments; personality changes secondary to TBI; memory loss secondary to TBI; word finding difficulty secondary to TBI; headaches secondary to TBI; insomnia secondary to TBI; balance dysfunction secondary to orthopedic dysfunction; anger issues secondary to TBI; depression secondary to TBI; Bipolar I disorder secondary to TBI; chronic pain/hip arthralgias supported by chronic left hip pain secondary to HO; facial and orbital fractures ; left hypertropia and esotropia due to motor vehicle accident; S/P eye surgery (right inferior rectus recession, right medial rectus recession ); right shoulder posterior labral tear; likely chronic right shoulder pain and possible functional limitations. He underwent multiple surgeries as a result of the accident.

¶ 8 Although Calvin has made improvements, he still suffers from difficulty with word finding; memory loss; balance dysfunction; visual problems; mood fluctuations; angry outbursts; physical weakness; limited ability to move; depression; agitation from over-stimulation; physical violence toward family members; dislike for people; asocial behavior; hip, back and leg pain; balance difficulties; right foot pain; cognitive limitations; visual limitations; and neuropsychological issues. He requires 24/7 supervision because of memory, executive functioning and physical limitations. He has reached his maximum medical recovery and will continue to require 24/7 supervision and physical assistance. He will require a legal guardian. He cannot drive a motor vehicle. He will require neuropsychological follow up and behavioral intervention. He will require psychiatric intervention and monitoring. The deficits created by his injuries are permanent and are expected to worsen with the effects of aging. This will increase the level of care he will require over time, and will call for additional services. It is estimated that his life care will cost approximately $4,600,000.

¶ 9 Calvin filed a claim with the other driver's liability insurer and also filed a claim with NPIC. NPIC filed a complaint to obtain a declaration that there is no UIM coverage for the accident because the 1980 Ford truck was never added to the Policy. The Defendants filed their counterclaim to obtain a declaration that there is UIM coverage for the accident. They requested damages arising from breach of contract, alleging that NPIC breached its contract with them by failing to provide coverage and that NPIC should be held liable for refusing to provide coverage.

¶ 10 Sadee was eighteen years old at the time of Calvin's accident. While growing up, Sadee spent time every day with Calvin and Renee. Calvin coached Sadee's basketball team. He helped her learn how to rope, ride horses, play basketball and sing. He was the teacher of her life, her guidance counselor. She resided with her parents at the Stucky Ranch in Avon, Montana, for her entire life until she went to college in Bozeman, Montana, in August 2009, the week after Calvin's accident. Had the accident not occurred, Calvin and Renee would have moved Sadee to Bozeman. Because of the accident, however, Calvin was in a coma in Seattle and Renee was with him, so neither was there to help Sadee move into the college dormitory. While living in the college dormitory, every day Sadee had to face the fact that all of the other girls had their fathers and she did not.

¶ 11 During the summer of 2009, Sadee worked part time at the Avon Cafe. From August 2009 until May 2010, Sadee lived in Bozeman on the Montana State University (MSU) campus and attended college. During the summer of 2010, Sadee moved back home to live with Calvin and Renee. She worked on the ranch and again part time at the Avon Cafe. During that time, she was available to spend time with Calvin and to help Renee care for him. In August 2010, Sadee returned to Bozeman to attend school and lived on campus until May 2011. From May 2011 to August 2012, Sadee continued to attend college at MSU and lived in Bozeman, off campus, with two roommates. She worked at Famous Dave's during this time. From August 2012 to December 2012, Sadee continued to attend college at MSU, lived in Bozeman, and worked part time at Famous Dave's. Engulfed by the pain Calvin's accident had caused her, Sadee was not able to keep up with college and dropped out in December 2012, with only one semester left. She emotionally and mentally could not return to college after December. Sadee has been working full time since January 2013.

¶ 12 Sadee was raised to be strong and independent but, since the accident, has been struggling. Until recently, she has not sought any counseling as a result of her father's injuries because she could not open up and talk about it. She thought that as long as she did not seek counseling or discuss it, the pain would go away. Additionally, she financially could not afford counseling and her health insurance would not cover the cost. However, Sadee began seeing Dr. Kenneth Olson, a psychiatrist in Bozeman, on October 25, 2013, and has continued to see him since. She has been diagnosed with Post–Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), sleep dysfunction and cyclothymic disorder.

¶ 13 The...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Md. Cas. Co. v. Asbestos Claims Court
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • March 25, 2020
    ..."the common law is consonant with the changing needs of society" in the absence of a contrary legislative determination. See N. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Stucky , 2014 MT 299, ¶¶ 20-21, 377 Mont. 25, 338 P.3d 56 (quoting Miller v. Fallon County, 222 Mont. 214, 217-18, 721 P.2d 342, 344 (1986) ); Mou......
  • Bassett v. Lamantia
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • May 8, 2018
    ...of a certified question is "purely an interpretation of the law as applied to the agreed facts underlying the action." N. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Stucky , 2014 MT 299, ¶ 18, 377 Mont. 25, 338 P.3d 56 (quoting Van Orden v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n , 2014 MT 45, ¶ 10, 374 Mont. 62, 318 P.3d 1042 ).......
  • U.S. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Estate of Ward
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • March 26, 2019
    ...of a certified question is "purely an interpretation of the law as applied to the agreed facts underlying the action." N. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Stucky , 2014 MT 299, ¶ 18, 377 Mont. 25, 338 P.3d 56 (internal citation omitted).DISCUSSION ¶7 The interpretation of an insurance contract is a questio......
  • High Country Paving, Inc. v. United Fire & Cas. Co.
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • December 31, 2019
    ...underlying the action." U.S. Specialty Ins. Co. v. Estate of Ward , 2019 MT 72, ¶ 6, 395 Mont. 199, 444 P.3d 381 (quoting N. Pac. Ins. Co. v. Stucky , 2014 MT 299, ¶ 18, 377 Mont. 25, 338 P.3d 56 ).DISCUSSION ¶11 "It is not the job of this Court to determine questions of fact or to apply th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT