Sykora v. Farmers Ins. Co.

• Citation: 642 S.W.3d 381
• Decision Date: 29 March 2022
• Docket Number: WD 84445
• Parties: Tracy SYKORA, et al., Respondents, v. FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Appellant.
• Court: Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)

642 S.W.3d 381

Tracy SYKORA, et al., Respondents,

v.FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Appellant.

WD 84445

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

OPINION FILED: March 29, 2022

Steve Garner and Grant Rahmeyer, Springfield, MO, Attorneys for Respondents.

Scott D. Hofer and James P. Maloney, Kansas City, MO, Attorneys for Appellant.

Before Division One: Mark D. Pfeiffer, Presiding Judge, and Karen King Mitchell and Gary D. Witt, Judges

Karen King Mitchell, Judge

Farmers Insurance Company, Inc., appeals from the grant of summary judgment in favor of Tracy Sykora, et al., on the petition for equitable garnishment. Farmers raises four points on appeal: (1) error in denying Farmers's motion for summary judgment; (2) error in granting Sykora's motion for summary judgment because Sykora was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law in that Farmers had no duty to defend; (3) error in granting Sykora's motion for summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact; and (4) error in granting Sykora's motion for summary judgment because Sykora was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law in that a policy exclusion applied. But, because the judgment below is not final, we dismiss this appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction.

Background

On April 21, 2014, Joseph Surratt drove his vehicle while intoxicated and struck George Sykora's vehicle, causing George's death.¹ Joseph later pled guilty to first-degree involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. George's wife Tracy Sykora and their two children sued Joseph for wrongful death and obtained a judgment awarding $22,500,000 in damages. The wrongful death action initially named Chad and Kristy Surratt (Joseph's parents) as defendants as well under the theory of negligent entrustment with respect to Joseph. The petition alleged that, though he was over 18 years old at the time, Joseph was living with Chad and Kristy and was unable to make decisions for himself as a result of drug usage, and Chad and Kristy were aware of and enabled Joseph's drug usage.

At the time of George's death, Chad and Kristy had an automobile insurance policy with Farmers. The policy identified Chad and Kristy as the "named insured[s]," with an address of 4408 SW Admiral Byrd Dr., Lee's Summit, Missouri. The policy did not identify Joseph by name as a "household driver," but it did provide:

We will pay damages for which any insured person is legally liable because of bodily injury to any person and property damage arising out of the ownership, maintenance or use of a private passenger car , a utility car , or a utility trailer .

We will defend any claim or suit asking for these damages . We may settle when we consider it appropriate. We will not defend any suit or make additional payments after we have paid the limit of liability for the coverage.

...

Insured person as used in this part means:

1. You or any family member .

The policy defines "family member" as follows: "Family member means a person related to you by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident of your household."

In conjunction with the wrongful death suit, Sykora issued a demand letter to Farmers to pay out the limit of its policy. Farmers rejected Sykora's demand, asserting that Joseph was not covered by Chad and Kristy's policy because Joseph was not a resident of 4408 SW Admiral Byrd Dr. at the time of the accident.

After obtaining the $22,500,000 wrongful death judgment against Joseph, Sykora filed an equitable garnishment action against Farmers, arguing that Joseph was covered by Chad and Kristy's policy at the time of George's death and that Farmers had a duty to both defend and indemnify Joseph. Sykora argued that, because the underlying wrongful death judgment included a finding of fact that Joseph was a resident of 4408 SW Admiral Byrd Dr. at the time of the accident, Farmers was estopped from contesting or otherwise challenging the underlying judgment. Both parties moved for summary judgment, arguing about the legal issue of Farmers's ability to contest Joseph's residency. The court below denied Farmers's motion for summary judgment and granted Sykora's motion, specifically determining that Farmers had a duty to defend Joseph in the wrongful death claim and, by failing to do so, it could not subsequently challenge the residency determination made in the wrongful death judgment. The court below did not, however, make any determination as to the damages necessitated by its finding of Farmers's liability. Farmers appeals.

Analysis

"As in every case, before addressing the merits of the appellant's claim, we first must determine ... our jurisdiction." Stotts v. Progressive Classic Ins. Co. , 118 S.W.3d 655, 660 (Mo. App. W.D. 2003). "[T]he ‘right to appeal is purely statutory[.]’ " Butala v. Curators of Univ. of Mo. , 620 S.W.3d 89, 93 (Mo. banc 2021) (quoting First Nat'l Bank of Dieterich v. Pointe Royale Prop. Owners’ Ass'n, Inc. , 515 S.W.3d 219, 221 (Mo. banc 2017) ). Section 512.020(5)² provides a right of appeal to "[a]ny party to a suit aggrieved by any judgment of any trial court in any civil cause ... from any ... [f]inal judgment in the case[.]" "[A] final judgment is defined as one that resolves ‘all issues in a case, leaving nothing for future determination.’ " First Nat'l Bank of Dieterich , 515 S.W.3d at 221 (quoting Transit Cas. Co. ex rel. Pulitzer Publ'g Co. v. Transit Cas. Co. ex rel. Intervening Emps. , 43 S.W.3d 293, 298 (Mo. banc 2001) ). "As a result, any judgment that resolves only part of a claim, or that resolves some of the claims pending in a lawsuit but leaves others...