Stingley v. Redland Ins. Co.
| Docket Number: | 2005-WC-01442-COA Linked Case(s): 2005-WC-01442-COA |
|
| Court of Appeals: |
Opinion Link Opinion Date: 09-19-2006 Opinion Author: LEE, P.J. Holding: Affirmed |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Workers’ compensation - Date of cancellation of insurance - Section 71-3-77 (1)(b) - Admission - Validity of cancellation Judge(s) Concurring: KING, C.J., MYERS, P.J., SOUTHWICK, IRVING, CHANDLER, GRIFFIS, ISHEE AND ROBERTS, JJ. Concurs in Result Only: BARNES, J. Procedural History: Admin or Agency Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - WORKERS' COMPENSATION |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 06-20-2005 Appealed from: PEARL RIVER COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT Judge: Michael R. Eubanks Disposition: CIRCUIT COURT AFFIRMED DENIAL OF BENEFITS. Case Number: 2005-0035E |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | JAMES STINGLEY |
JAMES (JAY) R. FOSTER |
||
| Appellee: | REDLAND INSURANCE COMPANY | F. HALL BAILEY |
|
|
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: | Workers’ compensation - Date of cancellation of insurance - Section 71-3-77 (1)(b) - Admission - Validity of cancellation |
| Summary of the Facts: | Robert Kirtland, d/b/a Kirtland Trucking, secured workers’ compensation coverage through Redland Insurance for one year effective September 11, 1999. On February 9, 2000, Kirtland executed a cancellation request/policy release after receiving a cancellation notice for failure to make payments due under a finance agreement he had taken out to pay for the workers’ compensation policy. James Stingley was injured on March 1, 2000, in the course and scope of his employment with Kirtland Trucking when a falling tree struck him. The incident was reported to Crawford & Company, administrator for Redland Insurance. Not aware that the policy had been canceled on February 9, 2000, Crawford & Company began handling the claim on the basis that coverage was in effect. Payments totaling $62,795.94 for medical expenses and $29,852.76 in disability payments were made on Stingley’s claim. On March 15, 2000, Insurance Services of America, Redland’s underwriting agent, sent a notice to Kirtland advising that its workers’ compensation policy would be canceled on April 18, 2000, for nonpayment of premium. This was done without knowledge of the February 9 cancellation. Upon learning of the mistake, ISA sent another notice to Kirtland with February 9 as the effective date of cancellation. On January 15, 2003, an administrative law judge found that coverage was in effect until April 18, 2000. However, on March 11, 2004, the same judge set aside the January 15 order upon consideration of additional information and found that the document with an effective cancellation date of April 18, 2000 was the actual “Notice of Cancellation.” Redland appealed to the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Commission which set aside the decision and held that coverage did not exist. Stingley appealed to circuit court which affirmed. Stingley appeals. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Issue 1: Date of cancellation Stingley argues that Redlands’ documents show the date of cancellation of insurance as April 18, 2000, and, therefore, coverage was in effect on March 1, 2000, the date of the injury. Although he argues that Redland should be estopped by its own documents from arguing that there is no coverage, no reliance has been shown and no misrepresentation was made about the provisions of coverage. Kirtland, the employer, knew of the cancellation, his signature was on the lost policy release, and he was aware that the policy was being canceled for his failure to pay premiums. By signing the lost policy release, Kirtland canceled coverage consistent with the provisions for immediate cancellation set out in section 71-3-77 (1)(b). Kirtland agreed to the cancellation of coverage on February 9, 2000, and he should have known that any payments made to Stingley under the workers’ compensation coverage were a mistake. Therefore, cancellation was effective as of February 9, 2000. Issue 2: Admission In Redland’s answer to Stingley’s complaint, Redland admitted “that the parties were subject to the Mississippi Workers’ Compensation Act at the time of alleged accident or occupational disease.” Stingley uses this statement to support his argument that workers’ compensation insurance was available at the time of the injury. No evidence of this argument appears at the trial level or in the record of the Commission. An appellant is not entitled to raise a new issue on appeal. Issue 3: Validity of cancellation Stingley argues that the cancellation of insurance was invalid since it was signed by Kirtland’s wife who was not authorized to sign insurance documents. Even without specific authority from Kirtland, his wife’s signature on the blank document entitled “Cancellation Request/Policy Release” effectively canceled the coverage. First, Mrs. Kirtland admitted to signing her husband’s name to the form. Second, the insurance agent testified that the cancellation had been discussed with Kirtland prior to its execution. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
