Debra Erickson v. J.C. Bromac Corp.
This text of 687 F. App'x 531 (Debra Erickson v. J.C. Bromac Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM ***
1. The reference to $1 million in accident insurance in the agreement between J.C. BroMac Corporation, DBA EagleRider, DBA EagleRider Inc. (“EagleRider”) and Altria Consumer Engagement Services (“Altria”) was, at most, an offer to provide insurance. Since-there is no evidence that the offer was accepted by either Altria or David Erickson, it was not a binding contract. See Chipman v. Northwest Healthcare Corp., Applied, Health Servs., Inc., 373 Mont. 360, 317 P.3d 182, 185 (2014) (“Mutual consent consists of an offer and an acceptance of that offer.”).
2. Erickson accepted a different offer for accident insurance “upon the terms and conditions of the summary of coverage in the [Personal Accident Insurance/Personal Effects Coverage] brochure, a copy of which you acknowledge has been received by you.” The only brochure in the record refers to $100,000 in coverage, which amount EagleRider paid. Since there is no evidence of a brochure promising $1 million in coverage, EagleRider was entitled to summary judgment on Erickson’s estate’s claim for the higher amount.
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
687 F. App'x 531, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/debra-erickson-v-jc-bromac-corp-ca9-2017.