Hutson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
| Docket Number: | 2005-CA-01742-COA | |
| Oral Argument: | 11-06-2006 | |
* This video is best viewed in the most current version of Google Chrome, Internet Explorer with Windows Media Player plug-in, or Safari (Mac Users). |
||
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 04-17-2007 Opinion Author: Barnes, J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Insurance - Anti-subrogation rule Judge(s) Concurring: King, C.J., Lee and Myers, P.JJ., Irving, Chandler, Ishee, Roberts and Carlton, JJ. Non Participating Judge(s): Griffis, J. Procedural History: Jury Trial Nature of the Case: CIVIL - INSURANCE |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 07-29-2005 Appealed from: Hinds County Circuit Court Judge: Winston Kidd Disposition: JURY VERDICT FROM COUNTY COURT AFFIRMED Case Number: 251-04-23CIV |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | JIMMY HUTSON |
LARA E. GILL,
RONALD KEITH FOREMAN,
JOHN MARK FRANKLIN |
||
| Appellee: | STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY | SAMUEL HUNTLEY WILLIFORD, REEVE G. JACOBUS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Insurance - Anti-subrogation rule |
| Summary of the Facts: | State Farm filed a complaint in the Hinds County Court as subrogee to the rights of Joy Hutson, whose husband and coinsured under a State Farm homeowner’s policy, Jimmy Hutson, intentionally destroyed property covered under that policy. The county court jury rendered a verdict in favor of State Farm, and the circuit court affirmed. Hutson appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Subrogation is the substitution of one person in the place of another, whether as a creditor or as the possessor of any rightful claim, so that he who is substituted succeeds to the rights of the other in relation to the debt or claim, and to its rights, remedies, or securities. With respect to the damage caused to Ms. Hutson’s property, if Ms. Hutson could have maintained an action against Mr. Hutson to recover damages, then State Farm presumptively had the right, pursuant to the subrogation clause contained in the Hutsons’ homeowners policy, to “step into the shoes” of Ms. Hutson and maintain an action to recover for the claim which State Farm was obligated to pay. Mr. Hutson argues that the anti-subrogation rule prohibits an insurer from subrogating against an insured or coinsured and that this rule is applicable to the instant case. An insurer has no right of subrogation against its own insured for a claim arising from the very risk for which the insured was covered even where the insured has expressly agreed to indemnify the party from whom the insurer's rights are derived. State Farm did not assume the risk that its own insured, Mr. Hutson, would intentionally damage the insured property. Accordingly, State Farm paid the property loss claim at issue not because of Mr. Hutson’s status as an insured, but because of Ms. Hutson’s status as an insured under the homeowners policy. The State Farm policy provided coverage for “willful and malicious damage to or destruction of property” and excluded coverage for intentional loss to property only if that loss was caused “for the purpose of obtaining insurance benefits . . . .” State Farm does not dispute Mr. Hutson’s assertion that he did not cause property damage for the purpose of obtaining insurance benefits. Accordingly, Ms. Hutson was entitled to coverage for the “willful and malicious damage” to her property caused by Mr. Hutson. However, Mr. Hutson was not entitled to coverage for his intentional acts, despite the absence of an express exclusion. Allowing State Farm to recover for amounts paid covering the damages intentionally caused by Mr. Hutson does not offend the general principles of insurance law embodied by the anti-subrogation rule, and promotes the equitable purposes of subrogation. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
