Insurance Law: Vexatious Refusal-Sufficiency of Evidence-Deposition Testimony

Where an insurer challenged a judgment for an insured who sought uninsured motorist benefits after an auto accident, the insured made a submissible case on the insurer’s vexatious refusal to pay, and the trial court did not err in allowing deposition testimony into evidence since evidence pertaining to an insurer’s investigation of a claim is relevant to a jury determination of vexatious refusal, and the judgment is affirmed because the insurer did not show error in the admission of a settlement offer and demand and of the policy limits of the insurer’s uninsured motorist coverage, and the expert testimony was also properly admitted.

Judgment is affirmed.

Qureshi v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company (MLW No. 74823/Case No. ED107661 – 12 pages) (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, James M. Dowd, J.) Appealed from circuit court, St. Louis City, Noble, J. (Amy H. Surber for appellant) (Michael T. Harrison and Shannon M. Dawson for respondent).