The Insurance coverage Appraisal and Umpire Affiliation (IAUA) debate between Steve Badger and myself was “spicy.” Badger was getting a lot warmth from our debate that he took off his jacket midway via the presentation. 

Yesterday’s put up, Can the Appraisal Award Be Challenged As a result of the Appraisers Used Improper Strategies to Arrive on the Award?, promised to debate circumstances that permit a problem to the award based mostly on the methodology to find out the quantity of the loss. There are two factors on this matter.

First, every state regulation is slightly completely different concerning this challenge. The case at present will talk about Wisconsin regulation. 

Second, events ought to keep in mind that most courts usually are not inclined to overturn appraisal awards. It’s why appraisers and umpires must responsibly conduct their work and are available to essentially the most correct award they will.  

Turning to the case,1 the Wisconsin federal courtroom famous this concerning the policyholder’s try and overturn the appraisal award: 

[T]he mere proven fact that Wadena paid Meier an $939,136.58 award doesn’t imply the award itself is unimpeachable. Whereas appraisal awards are ‘presumptively legitimate,’ they are often put aside based mostly on a ‘displaying of fraud, dangerous religion, a cloth mistake, or a lack of awareness or completion of the contractually assigned activity.’ Meier invokes the ultimate exception, accusing the appraisers of confusion their contractually assigned activity: to find out Hartland Inn’s ‘precise money worth.’ However precise money worth is precisely what the appraisal award purports to calculate. Meier dislikes the quantity the appraisers arrived at and the tactic they used to get there. ‘Precise money worth,’ although, is rarely a matter of mathematical certainty, and there’s no single appropriate technique for calculating it. On this means, it isn’t dissimilar to physique fats. Medical practitioners generally use two completely different instruments to calculate a affected person’s physique fats proportion: skinfold calipers and Twin-energy X- ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans. See D.R. Wagner & V.H. Heyward, Strategies of Physique Composition Evaluation: A Evaluation of Laboratory & Discipline Strategies, 70(2) Rsch. Q. for Train & Sport, 135 (1998). The methods just about all the time produce barely completely different outcomes. However neither is ‘fallacious.’ And if a celebration to a contract agrees to have her physique fats decided by an appraisal panel, and that panel makes use of the DEXA technique, the celebration can’t search reversal on the grounds that the panel ought to have used skinfold calipers. But that’s primarily the premise for Meier’s lawsuit. Her grievance is just not that the appraisers didn’t calculate ‘precise money worth’; it’s that they did so in response to the broad proof rule, a viable technique however not her choice. The controversy over professional methodology, nevertheless, is just not for decision on this Court docket. ‘In the end, the better hazard in reviewing appraisal awards is just not an unjust award, however litigants second-guessing an award obtained on account of a course of to which they agreed.’ 

Meier analogizes her case to Coppins, the place the Wisconsin Court docket of Appeals took the extraordinary step of vacating an appraisal award. Meier’s scenario, although, is extra akin to that of the insured in Farmers. Similar to Meier, the insured in Farmers challenged an appraisal ‘award on the grounds that the appraisers didn’t perceive their function within the course of.’ The Wisconsin Supreme Court docket rejected that argument as a result of ‘the face of the award display[d] that the appraisers understood and completed their contractual activity.’ The identical applies to the appraisal award on this case. It compiles the estimates of varied specialists and averages them to succeed in the precise money worth of Hartland Inn. Calculating precise money worth—not calculating precise money worth in response to any explicit methodology—was the assigned activity. And the appraisers accomplished it. Had they, as a substitute, returned an award that estimated Hartland Inn’s sentimental worth, Meier would have some extent. See Quinn v. New York Fireplace Ins. Co., 126 N.W.second 211 (Wis. 1964) (setting apart an appraisal award that didn’t calculate ‘precise money worth’ because the contract required). However nothing within the contract, nor in Wisconsin regulation prohibits use of the broad proof rule to find out precise money worth as a normal matter.

I can recognize many claiming that what the panel did to find out precise money worth didn’t adjust to Wisconsin regulation. However judges will usually give you extraordinary causes to seek out the case over and the award binding. On this case, the courtroom went as far as to say the next:

Meier may have, after all, negotiated for a provision that will have assigned Wadena a extra energetic function within the dispute decision course of. However she didn’t. And freedom to contract essentially entails freedom to enter into contracts that one may finally remorse.

This can be a strained assertion. One of many primary rules of insurance coverage regulation is that the majority insurance coverage contracts are contracts of adhesion. There isn’t any bargaining energy for the overwhelming majority of policyholders. It’s a “take it or go away it” proposition. These are kind contracts with many insurance coverage rivals sharing the identical adhesion types. Besides in uncommon circumstances, insurance coverage corporations write the contracts, and policyholders haven’t any say concerning the phrases. 

Right this moment, those self same insurance coverage corporations are addressing the difficulty of methodology to their profit by rewriting the usual appraisal clause. We mentioned this development in State Farm New Coverage Submitting In California Ought to Be Regarding To All Within the Property Insurance coverage Trade—An Instance Is the New Appraisal Language. State Farm is just not bargaining with policyholders over this new language. 

The purpose of this put up is a warning that it’s exhausting to beat the methodology of an award. When an appraiser is pushing a loopy thought, which most would by no means agree with, as a part of a price proposition in an appraisal, it could take a really expert and ready opposing appraisal and competent umpire to grasp how ridiculous the proposition may be.  

This leads me to my last level—the collection of an appraiser is vital. In my afternoon presentation to appraisers and umpires, I mentioned the necessity for them to take their duties critically and be the most effective educated and expert they are often. Steve Badger mentioned that panelists ought to have a look at their roles as being an “honor.” I agree. 

The reply to at present’s put up is “sure.” However the success ratio of doing so is slight. 

Thought For The Day 

  • Lloyd Christmas : I need to ask you a query, straight out, flat out, and I would like you to offer me the trustworthy reply. What do you assume the possibilities are of a man such as you and a lady like me ending up collectively?
  • Mary Swanson : Properly Lloyd, that’s tough to say. We actually don’t…
  • Lloyd Christmas : Hit me with it! Simply give it to me straight! I got here a great distance simply to see you Mary, simply… The least you are able to do is stage with me. What are my probabilities?
  • Mary Swanson : Not good.

[the background soundtrack music suddenly stops] 

  • Lloyd Christmas : [he gulps, his mouth twitching]  You imply, not good like one out of 100?
  • Mary Swanson : I’d say extra like one out of one million.
  • Lloyd Christmas : [long pause while he processes what he’s heard]  So that you’re telling me there’s an opportunity. YEAH!

—Dum and Dumber – 1994

1 Meier v. Wadena Ins. Co., No. 23-cv-0158, 2023 WL 3821346 (E.D. Wis. June 5, 2023).


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *