Progressive Preferred Insurance Company v. Estate of Bradley D. Stover
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:19-cv-02536
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 10
Progressive Preferred v. Estate of Stover: Judge Tostrud granted Progressive summary judgment, denied the Estate’s motion, and dismissed the action with prejudice.
Progressive Preferred Insurance Company prevailed. The Estate of Bradley D. Stover’s demand for the Progressive policy’s $250,000 per-person liability limits was barred because the court held that coverage ended when Talberg sold the truck to Girtz. Casey J. Talberg was named as a defendant, but the opinion states that he was in default and does not describe a separate ruling against him.
What happened
In Progressive Preferred Insurance Company v. Estate of Bradley D. Stover, the court considered whether Casey J. Talberg sold his pickup truck when he traded it for a woodchipper. The Estate sought the policy’s $250,000 liability limits after Bradley Stover died as a passenger in the truck.
The Estate argued that the truck was not sold or transferred because Talberg never formally transferred its title. Progressive argued that the trade was a sale under the insurance policy, which automatically ended coverage when a covered vehicle was sold or transferred.
Judge Tostrud ruled that the trade was a sale even though the title was never transferred. The court granted Progressive’s summary-judgment motion, denied the Estate’s motion, and dismissed the action with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Progressive Preferred Insurance Company v. Estate of Bradley D. Stover · No. 0:19-cv-02536
- Eric Tostrud
- Sept. 9, 2020
Background
Bradley Stover was a passenger in a 2005 Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck that crashed in Iowa on August 25, 2018. Stover and the driver, Ronald Girtz, died. Casey J. Talberg owned the truck and insured it through a Progressive policy. Before the crash, Talberg traded the truck to Girtz for a woodchipper.
Talberg and Girtz signed a written agreement stating that Talberg had sold the truck to Girtz on July 23, 2018, that the truck was sold as-is, and that Talberg was no longer responsible for it. Talberg took possession of the woodchipper within a week. Girtz then drove the truck to Iowa, Talberg never drove it again, and Talberg would have needed Girtz’s permission to drive it. The truck’s title, however, remained in Talberg’s name, and Talberg did not notify Progressive about the exchange until after the crash.
The parties’ arguments
Progressive asked for summary judgment, which is a ruling without a trial when no genuine dispute of important facts exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. Progressive argued that the policy’s automatic-termination provision ended coverage when the truck was sold or transferred to someone other than Talberg or a relative.
The Estate also sought summary judgment. It argued that the trade was not a sale or transfer under the policy because Minnesota’s formal title-transfer requirements had not been completed or begun. The parties agreed that the truck was a covered vehicle and that Girtz was someone other than Talberg or a relative.
Court’s analysis
The court applied Minnesota law because the policy was issued in Minnesota to a Minnesota citizen and covered a vehicle registered in Minnesota; the parties also agreed that Minnesota law governed. Under that law, insurance-policy terms receive their natural and ordinary meaning, and policy interpretation is generally a legal question.
The policy did not define “sold or transferred.” The court concluded that “sell” ordinarily means exchanging or delivering property for money or something of equivalent value. A vehicle sale can occur without completing the paperwork required to formalize or record the transaction with the government. The court explained that title transfer may provide evidence of a sale but is not a prerequisite to finding that a sale occurred.
The stipulated facts showed that Talberg exchanged the truck for the woodchipper, required a written agreement making clear that he was no longer the owner, signed an agreement calling the transaction a sale, accepted the woodchipper, and gave up control of the truck. The court rejected the Estate’s reliance on Talberg’s delayed title transfer, delayed notice to Progressive, and alleged financial inability to pay the truck loan. The court said that speculation about possible second thoughts was insufficient to create a genuine factual dispute.
Ruling and disposition
The court held that Talberg sold the truck to Girtz on July 23, 2018. As a result, the policy’s coverage for the truck automatically terminated before the August 23, 2018 crash, and the Estate had no claim under the Progressive policy.
The order granted Progressive’s summary-judgment motion, denied the Estate of Bradley D. Stover’s summary-judgment motion, and dismissed this action with prejudice. The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 10-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.