Written by M. Sean High – Staff Attorney
On August 3, 2016, the United States District Court
Western District of Kentucky issued a ruling rejecting a claim brought against an
insurance company for the alleged negligent misrepresentation of a crop
insurance policy (Buckman v. Nau Country
Insurance, 2016 WL 4154463).
According to the Court, in March 2011, Marion County
Kentucky farmer Joseph Buckman applied for a Federal Crop Insurance Act Group
Risk Income Protection insurance policy for his 2011 corn crop. At that time, Buckman was told by his crop
insurance agent “that he would be entitled to receive an indemnity payment if
Marion County’s 2011 actual corn crop yield was more than ten percent less than
the expected yield…and [that] Marion County’s 2011 actual corn crop yield would
be based on planted acres” (emphasis added).
The Court stated that on March 8, 2012, the same
insurance agent informed Buckman that based on the crop yields for his 2011 planted
acres Buckman would be receiving an indemnity payment in the amount of $104,961. Sometime between March 8, 2012 and April 11,
2012, Buckman “leased his farm, disposed of his farm equipment, and exited
farming.”
According to the Court, on April 11, 2012, the same
insurance agent informed Buckman that the crop yields had been incorrectly
calculated through the use of planted acres and instead should
have been based on harvested acres. As a
result of the new calculation, the insurance agent informed Buckman that he
would not be entitled to an indemnity payment.
Subsequently, Buckman brought suit against NAU Country Insurance Company
alleging that the company’s agent negligently misrepresented the policy terms.
The Court held that “under federal law, Buckman is
charged with knowledge of his corn crop policy” and because it is his
responsibility to have this knowledge, Buckman “could not have reasonably
relied on [the insurance] agent’s erroneous representations.”
No comments:
Post a Comment