Myers v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance

Michigan Court of Appeals

Myers v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance

165 N.W.2d 308, 14 Mich. App. 277, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 899

CourtMichigan Court of Appeals

DecidedNovember 26, 1968

DocketDocket 3,370

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 165 N.W.2d 308 (Myers v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Myers v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance, 165 N.W.2d 308, 14 Mich. App. 277, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 899 (Mich. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The facts as stipulated to the trial court show that plaintiff Myers sharecropped for one Talt and his wife whose barn was burned while plaintiff was unloading baled straw into it. Defendant, at the time, insured Myers under a liability policy, by the terms of which it denied coverage. Talt sued Myers for the loss of the barn. In that suit wherein the insurance company refused to defend Myers, judgment was entered for Talt in an amount which exceeded the policy limits. Talt garnisheed the insurance company on the judgment *278 and the trial court in those proceedings found coverage under the policy. Defendant company thereupon paid the judgment up to the policy limits. Plaintiff herein sued for the excess of the judgment over the policy limits and the trial court based its judgment for defendant on a finding that there was no bad faith on the part of defendant in its refusal to defend or settle the claim against plaintiff herein. City of Wakefield v. Globe Indemnity Co. (1929), 246 Mich 645, represents the Michigan view which casts the burden upon the plaintiff to show bad faith on the part of the insurer, and the record showing no such bad faith, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed with costs to defendant.

Fitzgerald, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Robinson, JJ., concurred.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The facts as stipulated to the trial court show that plaintiff Myers sharecropped for one Talt and his wife whose barn was burned while plaintiff was unloading baled straw into it. Defendant, at the time, insured Myers under a liability policy, by the terms of which it denied coverage. Talt sued Myers for the loss of the barn. In that suit wherein the insurance company refused to defend Myers, judgment was entered for Talt in an amount which exceeded the policy limits. Talt garnisheed the insurance company on the judgment *278 and the trial court in those proceedings found coverage under the policy. Defendant company thereupon paid the judgment up to the policy limits. Plaintiff herein sued for the excess of the judgment over the policy limits and the trial court based its judgment for defendant on a finding that there was no bad faith on the part of defendant in its refusal to defend or settle the claim against plaintiff herein. City of Wakefield v. Globe Indemnity Co. (1929), 246 Mich 645, represents the Michigan view which casts the burden upon the plaintiff to show bad faith on the part of the insurer, and the record showing no such bad faith, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed with costs to defendant.

Fitzgerald, P. J., and R. B. Burns and Robinson, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 N.W.2d 308, 14 Mich. App. 277, 1968 Mich. App. LEXIS 899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/myers-v-farm-bureau-mutual-insurance-michctapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack