Wimberly v. American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania (CNA)
Tennessee Supreme Court
584 S.W.2d 200 (1979)
- Written by Sheryl McGrath, JD
Facts
The Wimberlys (plaintiffs) owned a restaurant and had fire-insurance contracts on the restaurant property with two insurance companies: American Casualty Co. and New Hampshire Insurance Co. (collectively, the insurance companies) (defendants). The Wimberlys incurred a loss of approximately $44,600 when Shelia McLemore crashed her car into the restaurant, causing a fire. The Wimberlys submitted a claim to the insurance companies, and the Wimberlys signed a subrogation receipt that gave the insurance companies the rights to all claims that the Wimberlys had against any person liable for the loss. The insurance companies paid the Wimberlys a combined total of $15,000 on the loss, which reflected the combined coverage of both insurance contracts. The Wimberlys also sought payment from McLemore, who was insured by Hartford Insurance Co. (Hartford). Hartford paid $25,000 on the Wimberlys’ loss, in a check payable to both the insurance companies and to the Wimberlys. The insurance companies and the Wimberlys each took pro rata shares of Hartford’s $25,000 payment. The Wimberlys, having losses not covered by any insurance, sued the insurance companies to recover the pro rata amounts that the insurance companies had taken from Hartford’s payment. The trial court entered judgment in favor of the Wimberlys. The insurance companies appealed. The court of appeals reversed the trial court’s judgment. The Wimberlys appealed to the supreme court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fones, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 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.