Interest Groups

Indiana Court of Appeals Permits Insured's First-Party Lawsuit for Fraud Against Insurance Company for Failure to Disclose Existence of Umbrella Policy - Insurance Coverage

Insurance Coverage

Posted on: Feb 28, 2018

By Richard K. Shoultz and Michael R. Giordano, both of Lewis Wagner LLP

The Earl v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. case is a continuation of a case that has provided insurance practitioners with multiple, substantive insurance law citations.  In State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Earl, 33 N.E. 3d 337 (Ind. 2015), the Supreme Court determined that the trial court did not err when it admitted as evidence, the amount of available uninsured motorist ("UM") policy limits.  On remand, this case has provided additional guidance to insurance practitioners in a recent decision.

Mr. Earl was involved in a motorcycle crash with a hit-and-run driver.  At the time of the accident, Mr. Earl had a UM policy with State Farm in the amount of $250,000.00.  Unbeknownst to Mr. Earl until after his UM claim trial, he also had an umbrella policy with State Farm that provided an additional Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00) of UM coverage. 

Read more.

If you would like to submit content or write an article for the Insurance Coverage Section, please email Kara Sikorski at


Indianapolis Bar Association (IndyBar) est. 1878 | 4,536 Members (as of 2.11.21)