Facts: After respondent David Moeller’s automobile was damaged in a collision, it was repaired by his insurer, petitioner Farmers Insurance Company of Washington. Moeller subsequently filed a class action against Farmers Insurance Company on behalf of himself and others similarly situated in the Superior Court for Pierce County, asserting that Farmers Insurance Company breached his insurance contract by failing to pay him the difference between his automobile’s pre-collision value and its post-repair value. The trial court certified the class but ultimately granted summary judgment for Farmers Insurance Company, ruling that the language of Moeller’s insurance policy precludes his diminished value claim. Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case for trial. Farmers Insurance Company appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.
Question(s): Does Moeller’s insurance policy preclude his diminished value claim?
If not, did the trial court err in certifying a class?
Conclusion: Justice Stephens’ opinion for the Court affirmed the Washington Court of Appeals, concluding that the bargain of Moeller’s insurance contract is to return him to his pre-collision position with respect to the value of his automobile. Thus, the Court held that Moeller’s insurance policy does not preclude his diminished value claim. The Court also found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in certifying a class.
Docket No. 84500-0 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 30880-1)
Petitioner: Farmers Insurance Company of Washington
(Counsel: Jill Diane Bowman and Stevan David Phillips)
Respondent: David Moeller
(Counsel: Stephen Michael Hansen, Elizabeth Cabraser, Scott P. Nealey, Kenneth Wendell Masters, and Shelby R. Frost Lemmel)
Briefs:
- Amici of Aia, Et Al
- Amici of Namic
- Answer
- Answer to Amici Dated 6-26-10
- Answer to Amici Dated 6-29-10
- Answer to Namic Amicus
- Answer to Namic Amicus Brief
- Appellants Brief
- Petition for Review
- Reply of Appellant Cross Respondent
- Reply of Respondents Cross Appellants
- Respondent Cross Appellants Brief
- Statement of Additional Auth
- Statement of Additional Authority Dated 11-28-11
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 1-5-07
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 10-28-08
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 3-22-05
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 4-11-06
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 8-9-06
- Statement of Additional Authority Filed in COA Dated 9-18-06
- Supplemental Brief of Petitioner
- Supplemental Brief of Respondent
- Supplemental Namic Amicus
Argument: Tuesday, March 8, 2011 2:30pm
[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]
Audio: Washington Supreme Court
Decided: Thursday, December 22nd, 2011
Prevailing Party: David Moeller (Respondent)
Vote: 5-4
Citation: Pending
Court: Madsen2 Court (2011)
Madsen
(Dissent)
Johnson
Alexander
(Dissent)
Chambers
Owens
Fairhurst
Johnson
Stephens
(Majority)
Seinfeld
(Pro Tem)
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Each opinion should appear next to the Justice who authored it.