Negligence – Claim Preclusion

Listen to this article

WI Court of Appeals – District II

Case Name: John Teske, et al. v. Wilson Mutual Insurance Company         

Case No.: 2017AP1269

Officials: Neubauer, C.J., Reilly, P.J., and Gundrum, J.

Focus: Negligence – Claim Preclusion

On November 24, 2013, a multi-car traffic accident caused severe injuries to multiple persons when a vehicle driven by Sabrina Srock rear-ended Emily Teske’s vehicle, propelling Emily’s vehicle into a vehicle driven by Patrice Rog. Members of Emily’s family were passengers in her vehicle and suffered injuries. Medical bills for the Teske family exceeded $700,000. The Teske vehicle was insured by Wilson Mutual Insurance Company (Wilson) and had $500,000 in underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage and $500,000 in liability coverage. The parties first litigated UIM coverage issues. The Teskes then brought this negligence action against Wilson on allegations that Emily was negligent in the operation of her vehicle. Wilson objected to the negligence lawsuit on grounds of claim preclusion. The circuit court agreed with Wilson and dismissed the Teskes’ negligence action. We reverse. Given the unique facts of this case, claim preclusion does not apply as there is no identity between causes of action. The Teskes’ UIM action sought a declaration as to coverage and was a distinct and different type of action from the Teskes’ current tort action alleging causal negligence by Emily.

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.