Penn's Estate v. Amalgamated General Agencies
| Citation | 372 A.2d 1124,148 N.J.Super. 419 |
| Parties | ESTATE of Louis PENN, Plaintiff-Respondent and Cross-Appellant, v. AMALGAMATED GENERAL AGENCIES and Richard-Lewis Agency, Defendants, and Empire Mutual Insurance Company, Defendant-Respondent and Cross-Respondent, and Western World Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Decision Date | 14 March 1977 |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division |
Marc L. Dembling, Maplewood, for appellant Western World Ins. Co. (Lieb, Teich & Berlin, Morristown, attorneys; Jerome S. Lieb, Morristown, of counsel and on the brief).
Martin N. Piper, Paterson, for respondent and cross-appellant Estate of Louis Penn (Brenman & Piper, Paterson, attorneys).
Joseph S. Montalbano, Newark, for respondent and cross-respondent Empire Mut. Ins. Co.
Before Judges LORA, CRANE and MICHELS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by
MICHELS, J.A.D.
The principal question raised by this appeal is whether a primary carrier owes to an excess carrier the same positive duty to take the initiative and attempt to negotiate a settlement with the policy coverage that it owes to its assured. The trial judge, on cross-motions for summary judgment, held that the fiduciary duty imposed upon a carrier with respect to its assured by Rova Farms Resort v. Investors Inc. Co., 65 N.J. 474, 496, 323 A.2d 495 (1974), did not apply as between primary and excess carriers, and that the excess carrier was solely liable for all sums recovered against its assured in excess of the limits of coverage provided by the primary carrier.
This litigation arose as the result of an automobile accident in which a taxicab owned by plaintiff estate of Louis Penn (Penn) struck the rear of another automobile while stopped for a red light. Penn had obtained automobile liability insurance covering the taxicab through defendant Amalgamated General Agencies. The primary coverage was issued by defendant Empire Mutual Insurance Company with limits of $10,000 per person and $20,000 per accident. The excess coverage was issued by defendant Western World Insurance Company with excess limits above the $10,000--$20,000 to $90,000 per person and $280,000 per accident.
Immediately following the accident Penn notified Empire Mutual of the accident and sent it a written report thereof. Empire Mutual sent a copy of the report to Amalgamated which, in turn, sent a copy to Western World. Thereafter Freddie Howard, the owner and operator of the other automobile involved in the accident and his three passengers, Charles Jones, William Jones and Emmet Jones, instituted suit against Penn to recover for the personal injuries they sustained in the accident. Empire Mutual undertook the defense of the action although apparently it did not notify Western World that suit had been instituted.
Settlement negotiations were undertaken prior to trial and the four claimants finally agreed to settle their claims for the aggregate sum of $10,875, which was well within the policy limits of Empire Mutual's primary coverage of $20,000. Howard agreed to accept $1,375, William Jones $1,500, Emmet Jones $5,500 and Charles Jones $2,500. Empire Mutual refused to pay the aggregate amount demanded but offered to settle all of the claims for a total of $9,875. It offered to pay Howard and William Jones the amounts they demanded but were only willing to pay $5,000 to Emmet and $2,000 to Charles Jones. When settlement fell through because all the claims could not be settled as a package, the case was tried to a jury which returned verdicts in favor of all of the claimants, which with interest totalled $29,827.20. Howard was awarded $1,918.74, William Jones $2,001.43, Emmet Jones $7,875.25 and Charles Jones $18,031.78. Empire Mutual's motions for new trial and Remittitur were denied.
Empire Mutual then filed a notice of appeal and notified Western World for the first time that judgments had been recovered in excess of the primary limits and demanded that Western World contribute to the appeal bond. Western World refused, claiming that Empire Mutual as the primary carrier had violated its duty of good faith by failing to settle the claims within its policy limits. As a result of Western World's refusal to contribute to the appeal bond and Empire Mutual's failure to post a bond in excess of the amount of its $20,000 coverage, Penn was forced to deposit with the clerk of the court $9,827.20 to avoid execution upon the judgments by the claimants. The judgments were affirmed on appeal by this court and were paid in full, $6,353.28 of the total payment coming from the funds deposited by Penn with the clerk of the court. The balance of the funds deposited was returned to Penn.
Penn thereupon instituted this action to recover the money it had paid the four claimants over and above the sums paid by Empire Mutual, as well as counsel fees and costs. The complaint against Amalgamated and defendant Richard-Lewis Agency, a co-broker, was dismissed on their motions for summary judgment and no appeal was taken therefrom. Thereafter, on cross-motions for summary judgment by the remaining parties, the trial judge held that since Western World was the excess carrier, it was solely liable for the verdicts in excess of the primary coverage provided by Empire Mutual. The judge also held that, even though its ruling on the law was dispositive of the case, there was no indication of any bad faith on the part of Empire Mutual in failing to settle the claims within its policy limits. Summary judgment was entered in favor of Penn against Western World for the amount of moneys Penn had paid to the claimants, together with counsel fees, costs and interest, and Penn's complaint against Empire Mutual was dismissed. This appeal followed.
We are...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Northwestern Mut. Ins. Co. v. Farmers' Ins. Group
...Aetna Ins. Co., 9 Cir., 564 F.2d 292; Peter v. Travelers Insurance Company, D.C., 375 F.Supp. 1347; Estate of Penn v. Amalgamated General Agencies, 148 N.J.Super. 419, 372 A.2d 1124 (1977); American Fidelity & Cas. Co. v. All American Bus Lines, 8 Cir., 190 F.2d 234; American Fidelity & Cas......
-
American Centennial Ins. Co. v. Canal Ins. Co.
...v. Sentry Ins. Co., 681 F.Supp. 357, 362 (E.D.La.1988), aff'd, 868 F.2d 1269 (5th Cir.1989); Estate of Penn v. Amalgamated Gen. Agencies, 148 N.J.Super. 419, 372 A.2d 1124, 1127 (Ct.App.Div.1977); Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Michigan Mut. Ins. Co., 93 A.D.2d 337, 462 N.Y.S.2d 175, 178......
-
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. American Home Assur. Co.
...Schal Bovis, Inc. v. Cas. Ins. Co., 314 Ill.App.3d 562, 247 Ill.Dec. 750, 732 N.E.2d 1082 (1999); Estate of Penn v. Amalgamated Gen. Agencies, 148 N.J.Super. 419, 372 A.2d 1124, 1127 (1977); Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Mich. Mut. Ins. Co., 93 A.D.2d 337, 462 N.Y.S.2d 175, 178-79 (1983......
-
Phico Ins. Co. v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co.
...175, 178-79 (N.Y.A.D.1983), aff'd, 61 N.Y.2d 569, 475 N.Y.S.2d 267, 463 N.E.2d 608 (1984); Estate of Penn v. Amalgamated Gen. Agencies, 148 N.J.Super. 419, 372 A.2d 1124, 1127 (1977); Western World Ins. Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 150 N.J.Super. 481, 376 A.2d 177, 180 (1977), but the majority......