Suing Insurance Companies Over Non-Covered Events go on and Fail

No Medical Bills Outstanding No Coverage Under Med Pay

Oct 22, 2021

Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/medical-bills-outstanding-coverage-under-med-pay-zalma-esq-cfe and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 3950 posts.

Courtney Young appealed the circuit court order that granted Shelter Mutual Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Young’s complaint against Shelter with prejudice. Young contended that the circuit court erred by granting summary judgment to Shelter and should have, instead, granted his motion to nonsuit his complaint without prejudice so he could try another way to sue the insurer. In Courtney Young v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Company, No. CV-20-201, 2021 Ark.App. 391, Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division I, IV (October 20, 2021) the court wasted its time ruling on an appeal after the Arkansas Supreme Court already ruled on the same issue in favor of an insurer.

FACTS

Young was injured in an accident when he was a passenger in a Ford Explorer. Young sued both the estate of the deceased driver and Shelter, which provided the insurance coverage for the Explorer. By the end of 2017, Young had settled all of his claims except the claim against Shelter for $5,000 in medical benefits. On March 7, 2018, Shelter moved for summary judgment and asked that Young’s complaint be dismissed. Shelter appended exhibits demonstrating that Young’s health insurance provider paid for his medical expenses and the remaining balances were written off as required by federal law; thus, Young owed no money to any medical provider. Shelter contended that under the contractual terms of the insurance policy covering the Explorer, Young was not entitled to any medical benefits from Shelter.

On December 5, 2019, the Arkansas Supreme Court handed down Crockett & Carter v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co., 2019 Ark. 365, 589 S.W.3d 369. Shelter believed the Crockett holding had rejected the precise medical-benefits issue Young was pursuing against Shelter in the complaint, entitling Shelter to summary judgment and dismissal of the complaint with prejudice. On January 13, 2020, Shelter filed a “Supplement” to its previously filed motion for summary judgment, attaching the Crockett opinion. On January 21, 2020, Young filed a motion to dismiss without prejudice, and Shelter filed a response in opposition, noting that Young did not dispute Crockett‘s application and had waived his absolute right to dismissal without prejudice.

Shelter filed its summary-judgment motion in March 2018, and in April 2018, the circuit court granted Young forty-five additional days in which to file his response. In May 2018, Young filed a timely response to Shelter’s motion for summary judgment, asserting that the medical-payments provision in the “Coverage C” portion of Shelter’s insurance contract was ambiguous or void as against public policy.

The circuit court granted Shelter’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed Young’s complaint with prejudice.

ANALYSIS

Although Young correctly stated that the supreme court has been resolute in holding that the right to nonsuit outlined by Rule 41 is absolute and may not be denied by the circuit court so long as the right is asserted before the “final submission” of the case to the jury or the court. If a case is submitted to the circuit court on a motion for summary judgment and an adverse ruling has been announced to the plaintiff, then the case has been “submitted” for purposes of Rule 41. Once submitted, the circuit court has discretion to decide whether to grant a voluntary nonsuit.

Young filed a formal response to Shelter’s motion for summary judgment in May 2018. In January 2020, Shelter provided the circuit court with a 2019 Arkansas Supreme Court opinion as additional support for its motion filed in 2018. Young did not request more time to present additional argument regarding Shelter’s pending summary-judgment motion or the supplemental supreme court opinion Shelter had presented. The circuit court did not request additional argument. The circuit court eventually entered summary judgment on January 22, 2020.

CONCLUSION

Shelter’s motion for summary judgment had been submitted to the court before Young sought to nonsuit. In these circumstances, Young did not have an absolute right to nonsuit his complaint without prejudice. Summary judgment is simply viewed as one of the tools in the circuit court’s efficiency arsenal. Summary judgment is appropriate when it is clear that there are no genuine issues of material fact to be litigated, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Once the moving party has established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment, the opposing party must meet proof with proof and demonstrate the existence of a material fact. When summary judgment is granted pursuant to precedent of the Arkansas Supreme Court, the Arkansas Court of Appeals must affirm the summary judgment.

The Shelter insurance contract provision to be interpreted in this case is precisely the same as that being litigated in the Crockett Supreme Court case and the arguments asserted against summary judgment (that Shelter’s contractual language was ambiguous or that the contractual provisions were void as against public policy) are precisely the same arguments rejected by the supreme court.

ZALMA OPINION

Suing insurance companies may be considered by some as a means of getting rich but here, to deal with a $5,000 claim for medical bills that were not owed by the plaintiff, seems to be an egregious waste of time and money. Once the Supreme Court ruled there was no reason to go on.

Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders.

He also serves as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance related disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in the insurance business.

Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling at https://barryzalma.substack.com/welcome.

He is available at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com. Mr. Zalma is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine/ACE Legend Award. Over the last 53 years Barry Zalma has dedicated his life to insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He has created the following library of books and other materials to make it possible for insurers and their claims staff to become insurance claims professionals.

Go to training available at https://claimschool.com; articles at https://zalma.substack.com,

the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at https://www.rumble.com/zalma ; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/ The last two issues of ZIFL are available at https://zalma.com/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-2/ podcast now available at https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/zalma-on-insurance/id1509583809?uo=4