Nixon Obtains Summary Judgment

Carr Allison shareholder Faith Nixon of our Mobile (AL) office obtained a summary judgment for her client, an insurance carrier, in a direct-action lawsuit.  The Plaintiff asserted claims for breach of contract,  negligent misrepresentation, negligent procurement and fraud after he was only allowed to stack three underinsured motorist coverages on a multi-vehicle policy with 5 vehicles.  The Plaintiff claimed he was led to believe he would be able to stack all 5 coverages under the policy.  Mrs. Nixon filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that the law was clear that a person can only stack three coverages and that delivery of the policy and declarations page to the insured was sufficient to put him on notice of his coverages, thereby negating any claim for breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, fraud or negligent procurement.  The Court agreed with Mrs. Nixon, adopting her proposed order, and granted summary judgment in favor of her client on all claims.

Great Results!

News

Zwilling to Present Webinar on Surviving Social Inflation and Nuclear Judgments in E&O Litigation

Course Description: A $1 million E&O claim walks into a courtroom and comes out a $15 million nuclear verdict.  Unfortunately, that’s not the setup to a joke-it’s the new reality of professional liability litigation. Social inflation isn’t just a buzzword anymore; it’s the single biggest force reshaping the E&O landscape.  […]

Learn More

Holder Joins USLAW Live! Podcast

Join Carr Allison shareholder Nicole M. Holder on the latest USLAW Live! podcast episode as she discusses Mississippi’s legal landscape and the issues impacting litigation across the state. Nikki shares insights on comparative fault, damages caps, Chancery Court practice, and other important legal developments affecting businesses and insurers in Mississippi. […]

Learn More

Sausaman Granted a Summary Judgment

Alison H. Sausaman of our Jacksonville (FL) office won a recent appeal of an order granting Defendant’s motion for summary judgment on behalf of a convenience store. The Fifth District Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s order, which held that an undefined change in elevation where concrete met asphalt […]

Learn More