Section 3.24 Litigating Policy Coverage

• Library: Settling Cases 2014

In Butters v. City of Independence, 513 S.W.2d 418 (Mo. 1974), Royal attacked the constitutionality of § 537.065, now RSMo 2000, apparently on the ground that the statute deprived it of due process. The Supreme Court rejected this claim, noting that the statute did not deprive Royal “of its right to be heard on the question of policy coverage . . . .” Butters, 513 S.W.2d at 426. This was consistent with the Court’s earlier holding in Eakins v. Burton, 423 S.W.2d 787, 790 (Mo. 1968), that the insurer would have an opportunity to litigate the question of its liability on its policy in any garnishment proceedings. James v. Paul, 49 S.W.3d 678 (Mo. banc 2001).

In James,the tortfeasor stabbed the plaintiff. He was charged with the crime of assault and ultimately pled guilty. The plaintiff then sued the tortfeasor and sought to garnish the proceeds of his liability insurance policy. Although the trial court found in the tort action that the...