Opinion ID: 1643748
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: Plaintiff Laura Siemonsma instituted an action against David Manufacturing Company and Peterson Grain Systems Inc. (PGS) for the wrongful death of her husband Gerald, who was killed on October 16, 1983, while attempting to repair a grain stirator which had been manufactured by David Manufacturing and installed by PGS on the Siemonsma farm. PGS, through Dakota Insurance Agency (Agency), had acquired liability insurance from Transamerica Insurance Company (Transamerica) for the period of October 1, 1981, to October 1, 1983. Because the death was after the policy had expired, Transamerica denied coverage. PGS brought a third-party action against Agency and later, by an amended third-party complaint, PGS also commenced a third-party action against Transamerica. Transamerica had entered into an agreement with Agency on August 15, 1980, which agreement authorized Agency to solicit, accept and bind policies on Transamerica's behalf. The agreement provided that either party could terminate their relationship upon not less than ninety days written notice to the other party. [1] PGS had been a customer of Agency since the spring of 1981 and had been insured by various other companies represented by Agency. Agency, with PGS's knowledge and approval, had automatically renewed PGS's coverage on other occasions. Agency first placed PGS's coverage with Transamerica for the period of October 1, 1981, to October 1, 1982. On September 13, 1982, Agency automatically renewed the Transamerica policy for a like period (until October 1, 1983). Agency mailed the renewed policy and a notice of policy renewal to PGS. Pursuant to the Agency/Transamerica agreement, Transamerica notified Agency that it was terminating their relationship effective April 15, 1983, and that Transamerica would not accept renewals after June 15, 1983. Agency acknowledged receipt of the notice of termination on April 18, 1983. On August 10, 1983, Transamerica sent Agency the following communication concerning the PGS policy: Please make arrangements to place this coverage in another market on expiration date 10-1-83 since your agency is no longer representing our company. Please also provide us with written confirmation of the replacement. An Agency representative acknowledged receipt of the communication but testified in his deposition that he had simply filed it and did not place the PGS coverage with another insurance company. He gave PGS no notice of any of these dealings with Transamerica. PGS assumed that Agency would automatically renew its insurance as previously had been done. Neither Agency nor Transamerica advised PGS of the termination of the agency relationship or that the policy would not be renewed. Upon receipt of the summons and complaint in the wrongful death action, PGS contacted Agency and learned that its coverage had expired on October 1 and that it (PGS) had been uninsured from October 1 until November 1 (when Agency finally placed PGS's coverage with another company). Don Peterson of PGS stated in his deposition that the agency representative had told him that the error was Agency's fault and that any losses incurred by PGS would be covered by Agency's own errors and omissions policy. The trial court granted Transamerica's motion for summary judgment on the third-party complaint brought against it by PGS. We affirm.