Maryann Thomas and William Crag Goza v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a bad faith breach of contract theory.

Liberty Mutual failed to answer or object to requests for admission.

allowing Liberty to withdraw the admissions would subserve2 the presentation of the merits. Requests for admission are typically used to identify issues that will not be disputed at trial, not to get the defendant to admit liability. See Meadows v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2001 OK 25, ¶ 6, 21 P.3d 48, 51 ("Unlike other forms of discovery, requests to admit involve primarily the elimination of undisputed matters, rather than the ascertainment of facts or the preservation of testimony for trial."). Permitting a party to withdraw or amend an admission aids in the presentation of the merits when, as here, the admission goes to a material fact. See id.; Raiser v. Utah County, 409 F.3d 1243, 1246 (10th Cir. 2005) (permitting defendant to withdraw deemed admissions that conceded core elements of the plaintiff's case under Fed.R.Civ.P. 36(d)). The central and dispositive issue in this case is whether the policy provided UM/UIM coverage for Thomas's injuries. Thomas's motion for summary judgment as to liability was predicated entirely on the deemed admissions. Thomas did not even include a copy of the policy with her evidentiary materials supporting her motion. Thomas relied on Liberty's admission that she requested to purchase an umbrella policy which would have provided UM/UIM coverage for her injuries. Liberty, on the other hand, attached a copy of the policy to its response to Thomas's motion for summary judgment. Liberty contended Thomas had a personal excess liability policy that expressly excluded UM/UIM coverage for Thomas's personal injuries. Whether the parties had a contract for UM/UIM coverage is hotly disputed. Finding the material facts were undisputed "based solely on the deemed factual admissions" eliminated the trial court's opportunity to consider other record evidence, including the policy terms, to determine if there was a genuine controversy as to any material fact.

Reported by Kent Morlan

Summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs.

Reversed