Wade v. Emcasco Insurance Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
483 F.3d 657 (2007)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
Jerry Wade’s (plaintiff) car collided with Ninh Nguyen’s (plaintiff) vehicle. Nguyen developed paraplegia, which may have existed previously or been caused by negligent medical staff. Gary Patterson, Nguyen’s attorney, offered Wade’s insurer, EMCASCO Insurance Company (EMCASCO) (defendant), a policy-limits settlement, promising to forward relevant medical records. Patterson sent some records, but not from the hospital stay. Nguyen’s settlement offer expired August 20, 2001. Cooper, EMCASCO’s attorney, sought the hospital records directly, but Patterson had signed the medical-records release form instead of Nguyen, thwarting his efforts. A witness implicated Wade in running a red light, clarifying liability. Patterson finally sent Cooper the medical records, and the next day, Cooper offered a policy-limits settlement, which Patterson rejected on November 19 to pursue a bad-faith claim instead. Wade lacked assets to pay a judgment. Wade admitted liability and accepted a judgment of $3.15 million. Wade assigned his rights against EMCASCO to Nguyen in exchange for Nguyen not suing Wade personally. Nguyen brought a bad-faith claim. Wade joined, bringing a breach-of-contract claim. Patterson admitted that from the inception he sought to bring a bad-faith claim. The district court granted summary judgment for EMCASCO.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (McConnell, J.)
Concurrence/Dissent (Ebel, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
