Wamsley v. Nodak Mutual Insurance Co.

Alan and Sharon Wamsley, North Dakota residents, were killed in Montana by Lester Stanton, an underinsured and intoxicated driver. Representatives of Alan and Sharon’s estate (the estate) (plaintiffs) sought compensation from Alan and Sharon’s insurer, Nodak Mutual Insurance Company (defendant), a North Dakota company, after receiving the coverage limits from Stanton’s insurer. The estate sought to stack three underinsured policies held by Alan and Sharon on their three vehicles. Stacking would entitle the estate to $600,000 in underinsured claims. When the estate first notified Nodak of its intent to stack the policies, the Montana courts were deciding the constitutionality of a state anti-stacking law. The estate offered to accept $400,000 in exchange for dropping its stacked claims for $600,000. Nodak paid the estate the underinsured coverage limits for the vehicle Lester and Sharon were in when they were killed and argued that North Dakota law prohibited stacking. Thereafter, the Montana court struck down the Montana anti-stacking law, and the estate immediately restated its demand for payment from Nodak. The estate set a deadline, and Nodak requested an extension, during which it filed a declaratory-judgment action in North Dakota. The estate then filed suit against Nodak in Montana and moved for summary judgment. Nodak filed a motion to stay the Montana action pending the outcome of its North Dakota action. Meanwhile, the North Dakota court held that North Dakota law applied. A month later, the Montana court denied Nodak’s motion for a stay, and Nodak moved for summary judgment and argued that the Montana court was required to give full faith and credit to the North Dakota court’s decision. The Montana court instead ruled that the estate was allowed to stack the policies. The North Dakota court then granted summary judgment to Nodak, holding that it was not required to stack the policies. After various other proceedings, Nodak appealed the Montana court decision.