Opinion ID: 1199778
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Complaint for Damages

Text: Bantz and her husband, Kirk Bantz, filed a complaint for damages naming as defendants Hamilton, Murphy Trucking and Bongard, Davis Transport and Ellis, Featherston, Ford Motors, and General Motors. The Bantzes settled their claims against Davis Transport and Ellis, General Motors, and Featherston before trial. They voluntarily dismissed Ford from the suit. The defendants who settled received Pierringer releases. [1] Hamilton's insurance company, Mutual of Enumclaw, did not give written permission to the Bantzes authorizing these settlements. The Bantzes went to trial against Hamilton and Bongard/Murphy Trucking. The jury, by special verdict, apportioned liability as follows: 1. Merrie Jo Bantz 3% 2. Hamilton 3% 3. Bongard 17% 4. Featherston 65% 5. Ellis 12% The amount of damages awarded by the jury was $131,175.00 to Merrie Jo Bantz and $5,000 to her husband, Kirk. However, the trial court ordered a conditional additur which increased the award to $238,500. The parties have stipulated that the Bantzes' right to recovery on the $238,500 judgment against each party is as follows: 1. Hamilton -0- 2. Bongard $39,328 3. Featherston $150,374 (settled for $17,500) 4. Ellis $27,761 (settled for $5,000) Bongard has refused to accept the terms of the conditional additur and a new trial on the issue of damages has been ordered. The new trial has been stayed pending resolution of the declaratory judgment action discussed below.