00-1432 Nugent v. Slaght and American Family Mutual Insurance Co.

Listen to this article

“Among other things, American Family’s claims representatives negotiated with Nugent, made payments to Nugent for property damage loss, made a settlement offer to Nugent, and reached a settlement with a passenger in Nugent’s vehicle. American Family agrees that during this time period its claims representatives acted as though American Family was Slaght’s insurer and that Nugent had no reason to suspect that Slaght’s policy might not have been in effect at the time of the collision.”

And, plaintiff clearly suffered detriment where she engaged in three years of negotiations and correspondence with American Family; she was interviewed by the company and responded to its inquiries; she signed releases for confidential medical and employment records; and she retained counsel and incurred the expenses of filing a lawsuit.

“Accordingly, we hold that the elements of equitable estoppel have been established in this case. We remand on the separate question of whether the doctrine should actually be applied to bar American Family’s cancellation defense because it does not appear that the circuit court exercised its discretion in this respect and we may not exercise discretion for the circuit court.”

Reversed and remanded with directions.

Recommended for publication in the official reports

Dist IV, Crawford County, Kirchman, J., Lundsten, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Arthur E. Kurtz, Madison; Andrew J. Clarkowski, Madison

For Respondent: David J. Pliner, Madison; Patricia J. Epstein, Madison