Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-4_04-cv-00598/USCOURTS-alnd-4_04-cv-00598-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Brian Colvin
Defendant
GYP McKee
Defendant
Mary Lou McKee
Defendant
Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co.
Plaintiff

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

MIDDLE DIVISION 

NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE, 1 

INSURANCE COMPANY, 1 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

v. Civil Action No.: CV-04-PT-0598-M 

GYP McKEE, MARY LOU McKEE, ) 

and ROBERT BRIAN COLVIN, 

Defendants. 1 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 

The parties have stipulated the facts which are attached hereto. The parties have agreed 

(see recorded discussion of July 15,2005) that the trail scheduled for July 18,2005 is not 

necessary, and that the court can decide the case on the agreed upon facts as if a trial had been 

held. The court will not repeat these stipulated facts. 

CONCLUSION OF LAW 

Unlike many insurance policies, including those referenced in the cited cases relied upon 

by the plaintiff, the subject policy makes no express reference to lawsuits against the 

policyholders and a requirement to report the same. There is only an ambiguous reference to 

"documents relating to the accident or occurrence." 

Further, while paragraph a. under "Duties after loss"' refers to notice "as soon as 

practicable," paragraph b., with reference to documents, does not mention a time. 

Further, this court does not find that the time when the plaintiff was notified was 

- - 

' There is no reference to duties after lawsuit. 

1 

FILED

 2005 Jul-20 PM 05:48

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 1 of 21
unreasonable under the circumstances. There has been no prejudice to the plaintiff. The 

plaintiff was well-advised of all the facts and that Colvin had an attorney. 

The court attaches hereto the legal arguments of the parties. The court concludes that, 

construing the ambiguities against the plaintiff, plaintiffs claims lack merit. This action will be 

dismissed with prejudice. 

This 2 'O%$~OO~. 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 2 of 21
HARE, CLEMENT & DUCK, P.C. 

LYNN HARE PHILLIPS 

KORI L. CLEMENT. 

T. SAMUEL DUCK' 

VANN A. SPRAY. 

AARON B. THOMAS' 

LAURA SIOWELL MAKI. 

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 

LAWYERS 

SUITE 1500. AMSOUTH - HARBERT PLAZA 

1901 SIXTH AVENUE NORTH 

BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA 35203-2618 

TELEPHONE (205) 322-3040 

FACSIMILE (205) 322-5577 

E-MAIL: hcBharelaw.Com 

July 7, 2005 

JADMITTEO IN MISSISSIPPI AND ALABAMA 

.ADMITTED IN CALIFORNIA AND ALABAMA 

'ADMITTED IN ALABAMA 

o~o~~~IN MISSOURI AND ALABAMA 

Via Hand Delivety 

The Honorable Robert B. Propst 

United States District Court Judge 

Northern District of Alabama 

1729 5th Avenue North 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

Dear 

RE: 

Judge 

Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company 

vs. Mary Lou McKee, Gyp McKee and Robert 

Brian Colvin 

Civil Action No.: CV-04-PT-0598-M 

HC&D File No.: 11 1-01280 

Propst: 

Pursuant to the Court's Addendum to Pretrial Order. this letter will set forth the 

plaintiffs information as required pursuant to the Addendum. 

1. A listing of the essential elements of the plaintiffs claims: 

On or about October 18, 2000, defendant Robert Brian Colvin ("Colvin") was 

allegedly injured while moving a three hundred pound shelf at the home of his aunt and 

Nationwide insured, defendant Mary Lou McKee ("McKees"). Colvin brought suit 

against the McKees for personal injuries suffered in connection with the accident at 

defendants' McKees' residence. On March 22, 2004, Nationwide brought the instant 

declaratory judgment action to determine the parties' rights and duties under the McKees' 

Nationwide homeowners policy. 

Nationwide claims that the McKees are not entitled to coverage because they 

failed to comply with the policy provisions. 

Specifically, the Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy issued to defendant Mary 

Lou McKee provides that in case of a loss, she must do the following: 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 3 of 21
The Honorable Robert B. Propst 

July 7, 2005 

Page Two 

Duties after loss. 

In case of an accident or occurrence, the insured will perform the 

following duties that apply. He will cooperate with us in seeing 

that these duties are performed: 

a. give notice to us or our agent as soon as practicable setting 

forth: 

(1) identity of the policy and insured. 

(2) the time, place, and facts of the accident or occurrence. 

(3) names and addresses of the claimants and witnesses. 

b. Forward to us every document relating to the accident or 

occurrence. 

[Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy, Section I1 - Conditions, p. 131 The homeowners 

policy defines "occurrence" as "bodily injury or property damages resulting from an 

accident. including continuous or repeated exposure to the same general condition." 

[Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy, Definitions, as Amended in Amendatory 

Endorsement 3191-A, p. 11 Additionally, the homeowners policy states that "no action 

can be brought against us unless there has been compliance with the policy provisions." 

[Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy, Section I1 - Conditions, p. 141 

-- 

The failure of the insured to comply within a reasonable time with a provision in "7 

an insurance policy requiring the forwarding of suit papers "release[s] the insurer from 

the obligations imposed by the contract, although no prejudice may have resulted." 

Standifer v. Aetna Casualty and Surety Co., 319 F. Supp. 1385 (N.D. Ala. 1970); / 

American Fire and Casualty Co., v. Tankersley, 270 Ala. 126, 116 So. 2d 579 (1 959). i 

, 

instant case, the McKees never forwarded the suit papers each received 

from Colvin in the underlying suit. The length of the delay between the dates the McKees 

received service and Nationwide's notice of service was approximately nine months, a 

delay that is unreasonable under Alabama law. 

/ _-- ----, 

Under Alabama law, the requirement o suit pmeceived b-. 

contained in the Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy is a condition precedent to i 

the insured's recovery under the insurance policy. See Safeway Ins. Co, of Ala. v. 

Bailey, 748 So. 2d 218 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999). .@- 4 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 4 of 21
The Honorable Robert B. Propst 

July 7, 2005 

Page Three 

2. A listing of the essential elements of the defendants' defenses. 

The defendants contend that they are relieved from complying with the policy 

provisions because they were not told by Nationwide that they had to do what their policy 

stated. The defendants admitted that they waited over nine (9) months before notifying 

Nationwide of the lawsuit, but that Nationwide was not prejudiced. 

3. A listing of the essential elements of the defendants' counterclaims. 

There are no counterclaims in this action. 

4. A listing of anv special evidentiarv or other anticipated le~al issues. 

Plaintiff is not aware of any such issues in this case. 

Should Your Honor need anything further, please advise. 

Respectfully submitted, 

HARE, CLEMENT & DUCK, P.C. 

Kori L. Clement 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 5 of 21
July 14,2005 

VIA HAND DELIVERY 

Honorable Robert B. Propst 

United States District Court 

Hugo Black Federal Courthouse 

1729 5th Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203 

Re: Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company vs. McKee, et a1 

Civil Action No.: 04-PT-0598-M 

Dear Judge Propst: 

Pursuant to this court's directive of July 1 1,2005, this letter represents the response of 

defendants Gyp McKee and Mary Lou McKee to the plaintiffs letter of July 7, 2005. 

The facts surrounding this dispute are quite simple: The McKee's nephew, Brian Colvin, was 

injured at their residence in October, 2000. The McKees' homeowners insurance was with 

Nationwide. One day after the incident, specifically, on October 19,2000, the McKees gave 

notice of the incident to their Nationwide agent, Randy Jones. Nationwide assigned the case to 

an adjuster, who met with the McKees and ultimately informed them that they found no liability 

or negligence on the part of the McKees and that Nationwide was denying the claim, but paying 

$1,000.00 in available medical payments. Later, Nationwide reassigned the claim to another 

adjuster, who had extensive contact thereafter with the McKees and with Colvin's attorney, who 

ultimately informed Nationwide that suit would be filed. From the original contact with the 

agent on October 19,2000, the McKees were of the opinion that Nationwide "would be taking 

care of everything". Colvin filed suit almost two years after the incident, and the McKees were 

served. Interrogatories were served with the Summons and Complaint, which directed that the 

McKees needed to answer within thirty days. The McKees truthhlly answered the 

interrogatories and, per their understanding of the instructions, submitted their answers to 

Colvin's attorney. Later, Gyp McKee, in response to correspondence received from Colvin's 

attorney's office, contacted the Nationwide attorney to see what was going on and to ascertain 

why he was still receiving letters concerning the incident, and as a result of this telephone call, 

Nationwide purportedly received notice of the complaint. This was nine months after suit was 

filed. Thereafter, Nationwide assigned, at various times, two separate groups of lawyers to 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 6 of 21
defend the McKees in the lawsuit brought by Colvin, and eight months after sending the Colvin's 

a reservation of rights letter, this declaratory judgment action was filed by Nationwide. 

The homeowners policy issued to Mary Lou McKee provides that in case of a loss, the 

obligations of the insured are as follows: 

"Duties after loss. (emphasis ours) 

In case of an accident or occurrence, the insured will perform the following duties 

that apply. He will cooperate with us in seeing that these duties are performed: 

a. Give notice to us or our agent as soon as practicable setting forth: 

(1) Identity of the policy and insured. 

(2) The time, place and facts of the accident or occurrence. 

(3) Names and addresses of the claimants and witnesses. 

b. Forward to us every document relating to the accident or occurrence." 

(all emphasis ours) 

The homeowners policy defines "occurrence" as "bodily injury or property damages 

resulting from an accident, including continuous or repeated exposures to the same general 

condition. The occurrence must be during the policy period." (Golden Blanket Homeowners 

Policy, Definitions as amended by Amendatory Endorsement 3 191 -A, Page 1). The terms 

"accident" and "loss" are not defined in the policy. 

Defendants first contend that they complied with the applicable provisions of the policy, 

as worded. Within one day of the occurrence, the McKees gave notice to Nationwide of the 

accident/occurrence. Obviously, this was done "as soon as practicable" as required by that part 

of the policy requiring notice to the agent of the items listed under sub-paragraph a. of Duties 

after Loss. Further, it should be noted that at no time does the policy mention any duties which 

apply after suit is filed or upon receipt of suit papers. All the policy says, in sub-paragraph b 

under Duties of Loss, is that the insured "forward to us every document relating to the accident or 

occurrence." Suit is not mentioned, nor is there any time limit specified in sub-paragraph b. for 

such forwarding. As worded, the McKees did exactly what the policy required of them. An 

elementary rule of law is that contracts are always construed most strongly against the maker. 

Martin vs. Leob, 349 So.2d 9 (1977). 

In this regard, it is interesting to note that in virtually every case cited by the plaintiff, the 

insurance contract specifically makes reference to duties after receipt of legal process. 

"If claim is made or suit is brought against the insured, the insured shall immediately forward to 

this company ..." is the policy language applied in Southern Guaranty Insurance Comoanv vs. 

Thomas, 334 So.2d 879 (1 976). "If claim is made or suit is brought against the insured, he shall 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 7 of 21
immediately forward to the company ..." is found in Standifer vs. Aetna Casualty and Surety 

Comvan~, 319 F.Supp. 1385 (1 970). The terminology of the policy in the instant case is nonexistent with regard to obligations in the event of suit and is at best ambiguous with regard to 

whether notice to the insurance company in the event of a lawsuit is the equivalent of forwarding 

to the company "every document relating to the accident or occurrence". Further, even if such 

were found to be equivalent, there is no time frame stated for when such forwarding of 

documents should take place. As stated by the Supreme Court of Alabama in American Fire and 

Casualty Company vs. Tankersley, 1 16 So.2d 579 (1 959), "The rule established by the great 

weight of authority is that where, as in the policy involved in this case, notice of the accident and 

forwarding of any demand, notice, summons or other process are specific all^ made a condition 

precedent to any action against the insured, the failure to give a reasonably timely notice of the 

accident or of the receipt of any demand, notice, summons or other process will release the 

insurer from the obligations imposed by the contract ..." (1 16 So.2d at 582). Such is simply not 

the case with the policy here. (emphasis added). 

Finally, even if it were found that notice of the receipt of suit papers or other legal process 

must be made within a specified time period pursuant to the terms of the instant policy, it is clear 

that the McKees acted reasonably under the circumstances. They were left with the impression 

that Nationwide would be "taking care of everything". They had face to face and telephone 

contact with the Nationwide adjusters prior to suit being filed, and were aware that Nationwide 

was in direct contact with Colvin's attorney concerning the matter. Their assumption that 

Nationwide would receive notice of the lawsuit was reasonable under the circumstances, and it 

was only after they heard nothing from Nationwide that they prompted inquiry to find out what 

was going on. 

Finally. the court has asked the defendants to distinguish the case of Safewav Insurance Company 

of Alabama vs. Bailey, 748 So.2d 21 8 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999), cited by plaintiff, from the facts of 

this case. Such is really rather simple. In Safewav, a judgment had been entered against the 

defendant prior to defendant giving notice to Safeway of the suit. As stated by the court in 

Safeway, "Safeway never had the opportunity to control the litigation, because a judgment had 

been entered before Safeway had knowledge that a lawsuit had been filed." (748 So.2d at 21 8). 

In the instant case, the underlying suit by ~olvin against the McKees has been pending for almost 

three years, and Nationwide, through two different groups of lawyers at various times, has 

defended the suit for all but nine months of that time, and that suit is still pending. Surely, 

Nationwide has been in position to "control the litigation". 

Further, plaintiff makes this statement in its July 7,2005 letter: "Under Alabama law, the 

requirement of forwarding of suit papers received by an insured contained in the Golden Blanket 

Homeowners Policy is a condition precedent to the insured's recovery under the insurance policy. 

See Safeway Insurance Comvany of Alabama vs. Bailey, 748 So.2d 218 (Ala. Civ. App. 1999)." 

Safeway doesn't say that. Nor does Safeway say that that case is predicated on a Golden Blanket 

Homeowners Policy as was issued to the McKees in the instant case. What the court does say in 

Safeway, by referring to Watts vs. Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Comvanv, 423 So.2d 17 1 

(Ala. 1982), is that, "The court noted that the insurance policy contained a provision requiring 

that, as a condition vrecedent to any action on the policy, a copy of the suit vavers be forwarded 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 8 of 21
immediately to Preferred Risk. The purpose of this provision is to afford the insurer an 

op~ortunitv to control litigation." (emphasis ours) The policy in the instant case makes no 

reference to duties in the event suit is filed or duties in the event suit papers are received. It 

simply makes reference to "duties after loss", and there are no time restrictions placed on the 

insured's duty after loss to "forward to us every document relating to the accident or occurrence." 

Finally, plaintiff has stated in its July 7,2005 letter that, "Additionally, the homeowners policy 

states that "no action can be brought against us unless there has been compliance with the policy 

provisions.", citing the Golden Blanket Homeowners Policy, Section H-conditions, page 14. 

That provision is entitled "Suit against us". "Us" is obviously Nationwide, not the McKees, who 

are the "insured, and against whom the underlying action was brought. That provision simply 

has nothing to do with this case. It applies to actions against Nationwide. 

With kindest personal regards, I am 

Very truly yours, 

cc: Kori Clement (by 

Bill Davis (by 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 9 of 21
j 

DAVIS & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 

WM. DOWSING DAVIS, Ill 

JANE A. DAVIS 

EARL J. REUTHER 

ATTORNEYS AT LAW 

2213 MORRIS AVENUE, SUITE 200 

BIRMINGHAM, AL 35203 

TOLL FREE 

1-800-772-8009 

FACSIMILE 

1-205-324-91 88 

July 14,2005 

VIA HAND DELIVERY 

Honorable Robert B. Propst 

United States District Court Judge 

Northern District of Alabama 

1729 5th Avenue North 

Birmingham, AL 35203 

Re: Nationwide Insurance vs. McKee, et al 

Dear Judge Propst: 

I received a copy of the Plaintiff's letter of July 7, 2005 and your request to respond to the 

letter. All the cases in her letter were used by the Plaintiff in its Motion for Summary 

Judgment and was responded to by the defendants in their oppositions to the motion and 

you ruled on the Plaintiff's motion by denying it. 

But in response to the Plaintiff's letter the defendant, Robert Brian Colvin, would show that 

the part of the policy that is in dispute is the following part: 

3. Duties after Loss. In case of an accident or occurrence, the 

insured will perform the following duties that apply. You will 

cooperate with us in seeing that these duties are performed: 

A. Give notice to us or our agent as soon as practicable setting 

forth: 

(1) identity of the policy and insured. 

(2) the time, place, and facts of the accident or occurrence. 

(3) names and addressed of the claimants and witnesses. 

B. Forward to us every document relating to the accident or 

occurrence. 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 10 of 21
Honorable Robert B. Propst 

July 13, 2005 

Page Two 

The facts regarding the defendants, Gyp and Mary Lou McKee complying with these 

provisions were shown as follows: 

A. Give notice to us or our agent as soon as practicable setting forth: 

(1) identity of the policy and insured. 

(2) the time, place, and facts of the accident or occurrence. 

(3) names and addressed of the claimants and witnesses. 

The above items were done as shown by Nationwide's adjuster, R. Dale Turner who in his 

deposition on page 22 and by the Nationwide Agent, Randy Jones, on page 16 of his 

deposition that the notice was given on October 19, 2000 for the October 18, 2000 

accident. This was done and ever, staten?ents vwe taken by NatiorwIde from the 

defendants, McKees, as shown by R. Dale Turner's deposition on page 22 as follows: 

Q. And the first duty which is under A is give notice to us or our agents 

as soon as practicable setting forth, and then it lists one, two and 

three. Identity of the policy and insured; the time place and facts of 

the accident or occurrence; names and addresses of the claimants 

and witnesses; is that correct? 

A. Yes. 

Q. And to your knowledge was that done? 

A. Yes 

(6) Was done also as the deposition of R. Dale Turner on page 22 of his 

deposition: 

Q. (BY MR. DAVIS) Did Nationwide ever receive a copy of the suit? 

A. After July 8'h, 2003. 

Q. Yeah. I understand, but after y'all, received a copy; is that correct? 

A. After, yeah. 

So the only question is; Did the fact that Defendants and policy holders, Gyp & Mary Lou 

McKee got sued on October 15, 2002 and did not notify the Plaintiff until July 8, 2003 of 

the suit, by law nullify their coverage with Nationwide for the accident of October 18,2000. 

In this case co-defendant, Robert Brian Colvin, took no default nor any action between 

October 15, 2002 and July 8, 2003 by the plaintiff, (Robert Brian Colvin), in the underlying 

suit against the McKees so the delay did not prejudice or interfere with Nationwide's right 

to control the litigation. 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 11 of 21
Honorable Robert B. Propst 

July 13, 2005 

Page Three 

In the letter the plaintiff, Nationwide, cites three cases but regretfully for the Plaintiff 

they do not apply to the present facts. 

(1) Standifer -was a U.M. case involving facts where the insured did not notify her 

company of her suit against the uninsured and she took a default and judgment for 

money damages against the uninsured and it was not until sixteen (1 6) months after the 

said default did she notify her insurance company. The policy in Standifer had an 

adjective before notify as it stated "he shall immediately forward to the company 

every...". 

(2) American Fire deals with a case where the insurer did not notified the insurance 

carrier of the accident, until tecl (10) mmths af!er the accident ad zfter suit vi2s filed. 

The policy stated the following "as a condition precedent thereto ..." That there would 

be no coverage unless all provisions were followed and one provision being "notice as 

soon as 

practicable". The policy in this case does not make it a "condition precedent" nor is 

there an adjective before notice in regards to papers. The only thing that mentions 

papers does not have a time limit or adjective under Section B. 

And finally, Safewav does not apply as a default judgment was taken by the Plaintiff 

against the insureds' insurance company. Notice was not given until the Plaintiff filed a 

garnishment to collect on the judgment against the insurance company. The Court stated 

that the reason there was no coverage was because Safeway could not control the 

litigation; as stated by the Court. "Safeway never had the opportunity to control the 

litigation, because a judgment had been entered before Safewav had knowledge that a 

lawsuit had been filed ... Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand the case for 

further proceedings." 

Nothing could be further from the truth in this case. Attached is a copy of the case action 

summary of Colviil v. McKee to show lhai the aftoriiey hired by Nationwide is cuniroiiing 

the litigation as required by Safeway. Also on the list of witnesses by the Plaintiff, 

Nationwide, there is none listed to show any harm to Nationwide nor any inability of the 

attorneys hired by Nationwide to control the litigation thus Safewav does not apply. 

Sincerely, / 

Enclosures 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 12 of 21
On-Line,SJIS Case Detail: DAVIS & ASSOCIATES Page 1 of 3 

Issued 

Return 

Service 

Answer 

Warrant 

C ACT 

AMT 

Comment 

Case 

County 

Style 

Code 

Amount 

DJE rial C 

DJlD 

DamagesComp 

Trial Days 

73 @CV 2002 200206 00 

ROBERT BRIAN COLVIN V GYPE MCKEE, ET AL 

STANDARD 

002 

101 52002 

001 

Track 

Defendants 

TONG NEGLIGENCEGENERAL 

MEDlATlO 

Type 

Status 

0847 

Filed 

Plaintiffs 

Court Action 00000000 

DamagesPun 

Lien 

For 

No 

Damages 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 13 of 21
On-LineSJIS Case Detail: DAVIS & ASSOCIATES Page 2 of 3 

Date Time Code 

10152002 1507 FILE 

10152002 1507 ORlG 

10152002 1507 TDMJ 

10152002 1507 ASSJ 

10152002 1507 STAT 

10152002 1507 PART 

10152002 1507 ATTY 

101 52002 1526 PART 

10152002 1526 SUMM 

10152002 1526 PART 

10152002 1526 SUMM 

10152002 1526 CASP 

10152002 1526 CASP 

10232002 0905 SERC 

10232002 0905 SERC 

01232003 0000 NANS 

01 232003 0000 NANS 

07172003 1004 ATTY 

07172003 1004 ANSW 

07172003 1004 ATTY 

07172003 1004 ANSW 

09172003 1241 TRAC 

09172003 1241 DAT2 

09182003 1623 ATTY 

091 82003 1623 ATTY 

CACT 11 lForm l~xep D 

AMT 71 f-1 l~atisfied 1 

Comment 

Party 3 

Comments Operator 

FILED THIS DATE: 10/15/2002 (AVO1) WIC 

ORIGIN: INITIAL FILING (AVOI) WIC 

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED (AVO1) WIC 

ASSIGNED TO JUDGE: DAVID J. EVANS, JR. (AVO1) WIC 

CASE ASSIGNED STATUS OF: ACTIVE (AVO1) WIC 

COLVIN ROBERT BRIAN ADDED AS COO1 (AV02) WIC 

LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR C001: DAVIS WILLIAM D Ill WIC 

MCKEE GYP ADDED AS DO01 (AV02) WIC 

CERTIFIED MA1 ISSUED: 10/15/2002 TO DO01 (AV02) WIC 

MCKEE MARY LOU ADDED AS DO02 (AV02) WIC 

CERTIFIED MA1 ISSUED: 10/15/2002 TO DO02 (AV02) WIC 

CASE ACTION SUMMARY PRINTED (AV02) WIC 

CASE ACTION SUMMARY PRINTED (AV02) WIC 

DO01 SERVED CERTIFIED MAIL ON 1011 812002 CHW 

DO02 SERVED CERTIFIED MAIL ON 10/21/2002 CHW 

NO ANSWER NOTICE ISSUED TO DO01 CHW 

NO ANSWER NOTICE ISSUED TO DO02 CHW 

LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: ESPOSITO KELLIE PAYN CHW 

ANSWER OF COMP DENIED ON 07/15/2003 FOR DO01 (AV02) CHW 

LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D002: ESPOSITO KELLIE PAYN CHW 

ANSWER OF COMP DENIED ON 07/15/2003 FOR D002(AV02) CHW 

CASE ASSIGNED TO: STANDARD TRACK (AVO1) CHW 

SET FOR: PULL DATE ON 1 111 2/2003 AT 0700A (AVO1 ) CHW 

LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: PRYOR WM HOLCOMBE JR CHW 

LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: GARRETT BILLINGTON M CHW 

Party ID 002 Name MCKEE MARY LOU pype 

INDX 'CICOLVIN ANAM 1 ID 

SSN 606 NORWOOD AVENUE lSex 

09192003 0202 TRAK TRACK NOTICE MAILED CHW 

10212003 1436 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: GAINES RALPH D Ill CHW 

10212003 1436 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH CHW 

10212003 1437 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D002: GAINES RALPH D 111 CHW 

10212003 1437 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D002: MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH CHW 

10212003 1439 SORD SERVICE ORDER SENT TO DO01 CHW 

12302003 1057 TRAN TRANSMITTAL NOTICE SENT TO ALL ATTORNEYS CHW 

01212004 1332 TRAN TRANSMITTAL NOTICE SENT TO ALL ATTORNEYS CHW 

01212004 1341 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: GAINES RALPH D Ill CHW 

01212004 1341 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH CHW 

01212004 1341 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: PRYOR WM HOLCOMBE JR CHW 

INDIVIDUAL 

DJE 

DOB 

Country 

ARY 1 

Atty 5 

Issued 

Return 

Service 

Answer 

Warrant 

C ACT 

PMT (Other7 (Satisfied1 

b-1 (Race] 

ALBERTVILLE AL 35950 0000 IPhone )256 000 0000 

MOAK ANDREW 

JOSEPH nY 3 

US 

GAINES RALPH D 

111 

101 52002 CERTIFIED MA1 !Reissue d 

17 

1021 2002 pype 

F!i 

CERTIFIED MA1 [Sew On 

m 

I 

071 52003 D COMP DENIED INS Not INA ~ot (01 232003 EkII' p~iii-l 71 p----j l~xe~ lo 

City 

Atty 

Atty 6 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 14 of 21
On-Line. SJIS Case ~etail: DAVIS & ASSOCIATES Page 3 of 3 

01212004 1341 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D001: GARRETT BlLLlNGTON M 

01212004 1342 Am LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D002: GAINES RALPH D Ill 

01212004 1342 ATTY LISTED AS ATTORNEY FOR D002: MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH 

05102004 1339 TRAN TRANSMITTAL NOTICE SENT TO ALL ATTORNEYS 

05102004 1339 DATl SET FOR: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ON 05/27/2004 AT 01 1 

05142004 0210 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 05/14/2004 DAVIS WILLIAM D Ill 

05142004 0210 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 05/14/2004 GAINES RALPH D Ill 

05142004 0210 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 05/14/2004 MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH 

05142004 0210 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 05/14/2004 PRYOR WM HOLCOMBE JR 

05142004 0210 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 05/14/2004 GARRETT BlLLlNGTON M 

06042004 1140 DATl SET FOR: PRETRIAL CONFERENCE ON 07/08/2004 AT 01 1 

06042004 1141 TRAN TRANSMITTAL NOTICE SENT TO ALL ATTORNEYS 

06182004 0203 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 06/18/2004 DAVIS WILLIAM D Ill 

06182004 0203 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 06/18/2004 GAINES RALPH D Ill 

06182004 0203 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 06/18/2004 MOAK ANDREW JOSEPH 

06182004 0203 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 06/18/2004 PRYOR WM HOLCOMBE JR 

06182004 0203 DOCK NOTICE SENT: 06/18/2004 GARRETT BlLLlNGTON M 

071 42004 1409 DAT2 SET FOR: PULL DP.TE ON 1011 3/2OO4 AT 0700A (AVO1) 

11 092004 0939 DAT2 SET FOR: PULL DATE ON 01/12/2005 AT 0700A (AVOl) 

02072005 1632 DAT2 SET FOR: PULL DATE ON 03/02/2005 AT 0700A (AVOI) 

02072005 1633 STAT CASE ASSIGNED STATUS OF: MEDlATlO (AV25) 

02072005 1633 MEDT MEDIATOR ASSIGNED: FRENCH ROBERT B JR (AV25) 

02072005 1633 MEDT MEDIATION DATE SET TO: 02/02/2005 (AV25) 

02072005 1633 MEDl MEDIATION INITIATED BY: JUDGE (AV25) 

02072005 1633 TRAN TRANSMITTAL NOTICE SENT TO ALL ATTORNEYS 

031 12005 0952 DAT2 SET FOR: PULL DATE ON 07/13/2005 AT 0700A (AVOI) 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

CHW 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 15 of 21
07/19/05 TIIE 06:ll FAX 205 278 1865 

Click Here & Upgrade 

Expanded Features 

Unlimited Pages 

Complete .---- --.--.. --... --.. 1 

JUDGE ROBERT PROPST ++* ANNTSTON @ 001 

FILED 

2005 Jut-18 PM 04:30 

U.S. DISTRICT COURT 

N.D. OF ALABAMA 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

MIDDLE DIVISION 

NATIONWIDE MUTUAL FIRE 1 

INSURANCE COMPANY 1 

1 

Plaintiff, 1 

1 

VS. ) Civil Action No.: 04-PT-0598-M 

1 

GYP McKEE, MARY LOU McKEE and ) 

ROBERT BRIAN COLVIN, 1 

1 

Defendants. 1 

STATEMENT OF AGREED FACTS 

In compliance with the Court request at the Hearing held on Friday, July 15,2005, please 

let the following serve as the parties Statement of Agreed Facts: 

1. In 1997, the McKees purchased a Nationwide policy of insurance on their home 

fiorn Randy Jones. 

2. The policy sold to the McKees was prepared by Nationwide. 

3. The policy provides that in case of a loss, the insured must do the following: 

SECTION I1 - CONDITIONS 

2. Limitsofliability ... 3. Severability of Insurance.. . 4. Duties after Loss. In case of an accident or occurrence, the 

insured will perform the following duties that apply. You 

will cooperate with us in seeing that these duties are 

performed: 

a. Give notice to us or our agent as soon as practicable 

setting forth: 

(1) identity of the policy and insured. 

(2) the time, place, and facts of the accident or 

occurrence. 

(3) names and addressed of the claimants and 

witnesses. 

07/19/05 TIJE 07 : 16 [TX/RX NO 85541 @ 001 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 16 of 21
07/19/05 TIiE 06:12 FAX 205 278 1865 

Click Here B Upgrade 

Expanded Features 

Unlimited Pages 

Com~lete 

J1JDGE ROBERT PROPST +++ ANNISTON @J 002 

b. Forward to us every document relating to the 

accident or occurrence. 

c. At our request, assist in: 

(I) making settlement. 

(2) enforcing a right of contribution or indemnity 

against a person or 

entity who may be liable to an insured. 

(3) conducting suits, and attending hearings and 

trials. 

(4) giving evidence and asking witnesses to attend. 

d. Under the coverage - Damage to Property of Others 

- submit to us, within 60 days after the loss, a sworn 

proof of loss and exhibit the damaged property, if 

which the insured's control. 

e. The insured shall not, except at the insured's own 

cost, voluntarily make a payment, assume an 

obligation, or incur an expense other than for first 

aid to others at the time of the bodily injury. 

f Under the coverage - Accident Death Benefits: 

(I) you agree to authorize us to receive medical 

reports and copies of supporting records. 

(2) we have the right and opportunity to make an 

autopsy where not forbidden by law. 

(3) coverage ends on its nearest anniversary date to 

an insured reading hs 65~'~ birthday. 

4. The policy defines "occurrence" as "bodily injury or property damages resulting 

fiom an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to the same general condition." 

5. On or about October 18, 2000, Robert Brian Colvin was injured at the residence of 

Nationwide insured, Mary Lou McKee. Mr. Colvin is the nephew of Mary Lou McKee and her 

husband, Gyp McKee. 

6. In the process of moving a self at the McKees' residence, Mr. Colvin injured his 

hand. 

7. At this time, the McKees' homeowners insurance was with Nationwide Mutual 

Fire insurance Company. 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 17 of 21
07/19/05 TUE 06:12 FAX 205 

Click Here B Upgrade 

Expanded Features 

Unlimited Pages 

Complete 

JUDGE ROBERT PROPST +++ ANNISTON 

8. On October 19, 2000, the McKees gave notice of the incident to Nationwide 

Mutual Fire Insurance Company by calling their agent, Randy Jones, and reported the same. 

9. The claim was assigned to Nationwide adjuster Melissa Wilson, who met with Mr. 

Colvin on October 26, 2000, and five days later, on October 31, 2000, met with the McKees at 

their residence. 

10. On November 7, 2000, Ms. Wilson contacted Gyp McKee and informed him that 

she had found no liability or negligence on the part of the McKees. 

I I. During this conversation, Ms. Wilson informed Gyp McKee that Mr. Colvin's 

claim was going to be denied because there appeared to be no liability on the part of the McKees, 

but that there was $1,000.00 available in medical payments. The $1,000.00 in medical payments 

was paid to Mr. Colvin in two payments, one on December 5, 2000 and the second on January 

17,2001. 

12. In February 2001, Nationwide reassigned the claim from Ms. Wdson to Dale 

Turner. 

13. March 30, 2001, Mr. Turner called and left a message on the answering machine 

for Mary Lou McKee. 

14. March 30, 2001, Mr. Turner called the plaintiffs (Mr. Colvin's) attorney and 

spoke to the secretary to see if plaintS(Mr. Colvin) was stdl pursuing a claim. 

15. April 20, 2001, Mr. Tumer spoke with Mrs. McKee by telephone. 

16. May 3,2001, Mi. Turner called the McKees and leaves a message. 

17. May 3, 2001, Mr. Turner has a conversation with the legal assistant in Mr. 

Colvin's attorney's office. 

07/19/05 TUE 07:16 ITX/RX NO 85541 @I003 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 18 of 21
07/19/05 TlTE 06:12 FAX 205 278 1865 

Click Here 8 Upgrade 

Expanded Features 

PDF Unllrnited Pages 

___I____ 

Complete __-- 7 

JUDGE ROBERT PROPST +++ ANNISTON @I 004 

18. June 20, 2001, Mr. Turner verifies that 

claim. 

Mr. Colvin's attorney was pursuing the 

19. July 24, 200 1, a recorded interview of the McKees is taken. 

20. September 19, 2001, through a series of calls, Mr, Turner again confirmed 

representations of Mr. Colvh. 

2 1. December 19, 2001, a settlement conference is had in Huntsdle, Alabama. The 

case did not settle. Nationwide is informed that if case did not settle, Mr. Colvin would be filing 

suit. Colvin never provided Nationwide with a copy of the lawsuit. The McKees did not provide 

any notice of the lawsuit until nine months after they had been served and after they had filed 

answers to discovery. 

22. At around ths same time, a settlementldemand package fiom Mr. Colvin's 

attorney is received by Nationwide. This package does not contain a Summons and Complaint. 

23. On October 15, 2002, Mr. Colvin filed suit against the McKees. This underlying 

lawsuit was filed in Marshall County, Albertville Division, Alabama and was styled "Robert Brian 

Colvin v. Gyp McKee and Mary Lou McKee, et al." and assigned Civil Action CV-02-200206. 

24. On or about October 18, 2002, Gypsy ("Gyp") McKee was served with a copy of 

a Summons and Complaint for the underlying lawsuit filed by Mr. Colvin for personal injuries 

suffered in connection with the incident at the McKees' home. Mary Lou McKee was served with 

a copy of the Summons and Complaint on October 21, 2002. 

25. On January 23, 2003, an Answer Notice was sent to the McKees by the Court for 

failure to answer Mr. Colvin's lawsuit. 

26. The McKees never told Nationwide about the lawsuit. The McKees never told 

Nationwide that they had been served with a lawsuit. Nine months after being sued\ and served 

07/19/05 TIJE 07:16 ITX/RX NO 85541 m004 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 19 of 21
07/19/05 TUE 06:13 FAX 205 278 1865 

Expanded Features 

Unl~mlted Pages 

Complete ---- 

JlJDGE ROBERT PROPST +*- ANNISTON 

with the Complaint, the McKees contacted Nationwide to advise that they were receiving letters 

fiom Mr. Colvin's attorney. The McKees never provided Nationwide with a copy of the Answer 

Notice. 

27. Although the McKees were required to provide Nationwide with a copy of "every 

document relating to the accident or occurrence" under their Nationwide Homeowners Policy, 

Nationwide was never provided any notice of suit being filed against the McKees or the Answer 

Notice until nine months later. 

28. In fact, on July 7, 2003, Mr. Turner received a telephone call fiom Gyp McKee 

advising Nationwide that he was receiving letters fiom Mr. Colvin's attorney. 

29. Th was the &st contact Nationwide had had &om the McKees on the claim since 

December 19,2001 

30. In that conversation, Mr. McKee, when asked by Nationwide, specifically denied 

having received any lawsuit papers. 

31. On July 8, 2003, Mr. Turner also spoke with Mrs. McKee and she advised that 

she, with assistance from Gyp McKee, had received a questionnaire &om Mr. Colvin's attorney, 

completed it and mailed it back to his attorney. 

32. On July 11, 2003, Mr. Turner received the "Questionnaire" that Mrs. McKee 

stated she had signed and saw that she had responded to Interrogatories. 

33, Nationwide did not learn of the lawsuit until July 7, 2003, approximately nine 

months afier service had been perfected on the McKees, and after the McKees had responded to 

discovery. 

34. A reservation of rights letter dated July 21, 2003, was sent to the McKees. 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 20 of 21
07/19/05 TUE 06:13 FAX 205 278 1865 

Expanded Features 

Unlimited Pages 

JUDGE ROBERT PROPST ++ ANNISTON 

35. Thereafter, Nationwide tendered a defense under a reservation of rights to the 

McKees and simultaneously began their coverage investigation. Pursuant to the reservation of 

rights letter, Nationwide provided counsel to the McKees and presently that underlying litigation 

is still pending. 

36. Eight months later, Nationwide filed this declaratory judgment action. 

37. At no time was a default taken against the McKees. 

Respectfully submitted, 

s/Kori L. Clement 

Kori L. Clement (CLEMKS 125) 

1901 Sixth Avenue North, Suite 1500 

Birmingham, Alabama 3 5203 

Telephone: (205) 322-3040 

Facsimile: (205) 322-5577 

E-mail: 11.c(L2i.harelaw.com 

[CLEMKS 1251 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certlfy that a copy of the above and foregoing document has been served upon 

counsel of record by placing a copy of same in the United States Mail, properly addressed and 

postage amed, this the 18th day of July, 2005, as follows: 

James L. O'Kelley, Esquire 

300 Park Place Tower 

Birmingham, Alabama 3 5203 

William D. Davis, 111, Esquire 

Davis & Associates, P.C. 

22 13 Morris Avenue, Suite 200 

Birmingham, Alabama 35203 

s/Kori L. Clement 

Case 4:04-cv-00598-RBP Document 34 Filed 07/20/05 Page 21 of 21