Damron v. Sledge

105 Ariz.151 (1969)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ps brought an action against Sledge (D) and Polk (D) to recover damages for personal injuries 'allegedly sustained as the result of an automobile collision wherein Sledge (D) negligently and carelessly drove Polk's (D) vehicle into Ps' vehicle.' Ps' alleged that Sledge (D) was negligent and that he was driving Polk's (D) vehicle with her permission and acquiescence. Polk (D) was represented by the attorney for National Union Insurance Company which insured her car. Sledge's (D) insurance company, State Farm, secured attorneys who answered for him. It is claimed that no insurance coverage is available for the acts of Sledge (D) under the policies involved because he was driving without the permission of Polk (D). Neither insurance company believed that it had a duty to defend Sledge (D). The attorneys for Sledge's (D) insurance company withdrew, and Sledge (D) thereafter was represented by his own attorney. Sledge's (D) attorney soon found that he was not going to be able to collect any fee. He therefore applied to the court for permission to withdraw, and this was refused. The following settlement was reached. Ps executed a covenant not to execute against Sledge (D) and paid $2000 for Sledge’s (D) attorney fees. Sledge (D) assigned to Ps any claim he had against the insurance companies for failing to defend. The trial court dismissed the entire action as collusive and Ps appealed.