Moeller sustained property damage during a car accident. He was insured through Farmers, who paid the cost of repairs. Moeller argued that Farmers’ policy also covered diminished value of his car. Farmers disagreed. Moeller filed a class action lawsuit. The trial court granted SJ on behalf of Farmers. Moeler appealed. Farmers cross appealed the trial court’s class action certification.
The Court of Appeals analyzed the policy language, construing inclusive clauses liberally and exclusive clauses strictly against the drafter. The language stated that losses to the car from a collision are covered. The definition of loss was “direct and accidental loss of or damage to” the car. Therefore, the court found that the policy included loss of diminished value because such was a direct loss proximately caused by the initial harm.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the limits clause to examine whether Farmers had limited the liability elsewhere. After review of the limits of liability clause, they held that there was not a preclusion of recovery for diminished value. Therefore, they reverse the summary judgment motion and remand.
Regarding Farmers’ cross appeal, the Court of Appeals disagreed with Farmers holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it certified a class action.