Houchens v. American Home Assurance Co.

927 F.2d 163, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 3259

Facts

P’s husband had two accidental death policies with D

P’s husband traveled to Bangkok, and was never head from again

Seven years later, P is able to say he is legally dead and tries to get payment from D on policies. D denies the claim because his death wasn’t accidental.

Procedural History

District court summarily judged in favor of D

Issue

Is there an accidental death, and thus should there be a real trial?

Holding

Affirms district court, not accidental death.

Reasoning

VA law states that for the death to be ruled an accident, the burden of proving it was an accident lies with the policyholder. There can be no such proof, and thus under current law there is no case.

Norton v. Snapper Power Equipment

Facts

P was riding a lawnmower from D up a hill. Near the top it starting sliding backwards, and P ended up crashing into a creek and losing 4 fingers.

D’s riding lawnmower did not have a deadswitch.

Procedural History

Trial court, jury ruled for P

Judge entered a judgement notwithstanding the verdict to D.

Issue

Was the judge right in entering a judgement notwithstanding the verdict contrary to the jury’s decision? (AKA could a reasonable jury put in that verdict)

Holding

Reversed and remanded.

Reasoning

Although “p are not entitled to a verdict based on speculation and conjecture”, a jury is allowed to “reconstruct a series of events by drawing upon an inference”— and thus the lack of a dead switch is a possible to claim is the problem.

Ison v. Thomas

Facts

P sued D over property damages from a car crash. Won and was awarded $5k.

P sued D again over personal damages.

Procedural History

Trial court dismissed charges over res judicata.

Issue

Can P split his cause of action when he won the previous case?

Holding

No, P cannot. Affirmed.

Reasoning

Even though he won their previous case and the D didn’t respond in their answer the defense of res judicata, it does not matter— the KY precedent from their highest court does not allow splitting of actions.

Reise v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin

Facts

P applied for a faculty position and didn’t get it. He says it is because he is a white male.

Part of discovery, D wants a mental examination.

Procedural History

District judge said that the mental examination is a go.

Issue

Is the decision for a mental examination something that the court of appeals can alter?

Holding

Court of appeals has no jurisdiction on a interlocutory (not-final) decision

Reasoning

See above ^