Williams Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Dee-Bee Contracting Co.
| Decision Date | 14 November 1984 |
| Docket Number | 14459,Nos. 14453,DEE-BEE,s. 14453 |
| Citation | 358 N.W.2d 231 |
| Parties | WILLIAMS INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., Plaintiff and Appellee, v.CONTRACTING COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
William C. Garry of Cadwell, Sanford & Deibert, Sioux Falls, for plaintiff and appellee.
John E. Burke, Sioux Falls, for defendant and appellant.
This is an appeal from a final judgment of December 5, 1983, awarding appellee $3,598.69, plus costs and disbursements, and dismissing appellant's counterclaim for damages arising out of appellee's failure to insure properly. Appellee filed Notice of Review requesting prejudgment interest on its collection judgment. We reverse and remand.
Appellee, Williams Insurance Agency, Inc., filed a collection suit on June 24, 1982, against appellant, Dee-Bee Contracting Company, for failure to pay premiums on an insurance contract.
Appellant admitted the debt in Answer, but counterclaimed for failure to adequately insure an apartment building. The damages claimed resulted from a coinsurance penalty.
The trial court determined that appellee was indeed negligent in failing to fully insure appellant's property. However, the trial court also determined appellant was contributorialy negligent, under the circumstances, in failing to follow up on its request for additional coverage. Further, the trial court found that despite the fact that appellee's negligence amounted to 80% of the damage and appellant's only 20%, appellant was nevertheless barred from recovery
by the fact that South Dakota's comparative negligence statute did not apply to a strictly pecuniary loss such as the one involved herein.
During October 1978, Don Babinski, one of the principals in Dee-Bee Contracting Company (Insured), met with Roger Larsen of Williams Insurance Agency, Inc. (insurance agency) to discuss insurance. This meeting resulted from Babinski's disappointment with a previous company and the fact that his property was underinsured. Insurance agency secured from Continental National American (CNA) a policy of insurance on insured's apartment complex in New Brighton, Minnesota, which provided protection from, among other perils, loss by fire. The policy was issued on October 31, 1978, for a period of one year, and provided coverage of $2,300,000.00 at 90% coinsurance. This replacement value was an amount furnished by insured and agreed upon by the parties.
By letter dated December 29, 1978, the underwriting supervisor of CNA advised Larsen that, according to CNA's manuals, the replacement value should have been listed as $2,860,000.00. This letter was received by insurance agency on Thursday, January 4, 1979.
Upon receipt of the letter, Larsen attempted to contact Babinski immediately, but without success. Larsen was away from his office on Friday afternoon, January 5, 1979, until Monday morning, January 8, 1979. Larsen took no further steps prior to January 11, 1979. On that date, the New Brighton apartment complex was damaged by fire.
Sometime between January 3 and 5, 1979, Babinski was made privy to the December 29, 1978 letter from CNA. Babinski called the insurance agency between January 3 and 5 regarding the letter. He spoke to a secretary at insurance agency who informed him that Larsen was on his honeymoon, but that the matter would be taken care of. Babinski took no further action.
An adjuster from CNA estimated the fire loss to the complex at $43,925.65. The value of the building for coinsurance purposes was computed by CNA's adjuster at $2,713,521.60. A coinsurance penalty was imposed and only 84.7% of the estimated loss was paid. This was $6,720.62 less than the total estimated loss.
"Contributory negligence is conduct for which plaintiff is responsible, amounting to a breach of duty which the law imposes upon persons to protect themselves from injury, and which, concurring and cooperating with actionable negligence for which defendant is responsible, contributes to the injury complained of as a proximate cause." Starnes v. Stofferahn, 83 S.D. 424, 432, 160 N.W.2d 421, 426 (1968). "In the absence of knowledge to the contrary, one who is conducting himself in accordance with standards of ordinary care may assume that he is not to be exposed to harm from a breach of duty which others owe to avoid injury to him." Rikansrud v. City of Canton, 79 S.D. 592, 607-08, 116 N.W.2d 234, 242 (1962). Therefore, if insured conformed to the standard of an ordinary prudent person upon notice of the insurance condition, it would...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
South Dakota Bldg. Authority v. Geiger-Berger Associates, P.C.
...there was a slight setoff allowed for premiums due the other party. North River, supra. Four years later in Williams Ins. Agency v. Dee-Bee Contracting Co., 358 N.W.2d 231 (S.D.1984), we allowed recovery of prejudgment interest to both the plaintiff and the defendant on liquidated claims, a......
-
Junge v. Jerzak
...v. City of Canton, 79 S.D. 592, 607-08, 116 N.W.2d 234, 242 (1962). Frey, 484 N.W.2d at 869 (citing Williams Ins. v. Dee-Bee Contracting Co., 358 N.W.2d 231, 232 (S.D.1984)). See Howard v. Sanborn, 483 N.W.2d 796, 797 This court--in a case not cited by either party--has previously addressed......
-
Frey v. Kouf
...contributory negligence and what has been referred to as the "Right to Assume Doctrine." We set out both in Williams Ins. v. Dee-Bee Contracting Co., 358 N.W.2d 231, 232 (S.D.1984): 'Contributory negligence is conduct for which plaintiff is responsible, amounting to a breach of duty which t......
-
Amert v. Ziebarth Const. Co.
...Damages were awarded for performance of construction work based on the contract bid and its price breakdown. In Williams Ins. v. Dee-Bee Cont. Co., 358 N.W.2d 231 (S.D.1984), the court awarded prejudgment interest on estimated fire losses wrongfully withheld by an insurance company. Althoug......
-
Introduction to the claims game
...1-25 Introduction to the Claims Game §139 Failure to acquire sufficient coverage. In Williams Ins. Agency v. Dee-Bee Contracting Co., 358 N.W.2d 231 (S.D. 1984), an insurance agent in South Dakota was advised that he had understated the value of one of the insured’s apartment buildings. The......