Premium Only Content

Progressive Obtains Judgment of no Coverage
No Coverage When Vehicle not Identified in the Policy
Post 4994
In Progressive Specialty Insurance Company v. Willie Richardson, No. 7:24-cv-0974-RDP, United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Western Division (February 5, 2025) Plaintiff Progressive Specialty Insurance Company's (“Progressive”) moved the USDC for Default Judgment. Progressive seeks entry of default declaratory judgment against Defendant.
Key Points:
The vehicle involved in the accident was a 2015 Nissan Pathfinder, which was not listed as a covered auto under the Alabama Auto Policy issued to the Defendant.
Progressive argued that the vehicle does not qualify as a "covered auto" because it was not shown on the Declarations Page, was not an additional or replacement auto, and was not a trailer owned by the insured.
The Defendant failed to respond to the complaint that was properly served on the defendant, leading to a default judgment.
BACKGROUND
Progressive Specialty Insurance Company ("Progressive") filed a Complaint on July 19, 2024, seeking a declaratory judgment that it does not have any insurance coverage duties to defend or indemnify Willie Richardson ("Defendant") in a lawsuit pending against him in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Queens. The lawsuit involves a pedestrian, Estefania Aragones, who was allegedly struck by a vehicle owned by the Defendant on May 12, 2021.
The vehicle which allegedly struck Aragones was a 2015 Nissan Pathfinder. Progressive alleged that title documentation reflected that Defendant was the owner of that vehicle, had purchased it on July 4, 2018, and obtained title to it on July 17, 2018.
Progressive alleged that the vehicle involved in the alleged May 12, 2021 accident would not qualify as a “covered auto” because it was not shown on the Declarations Page for the coverages under that policy. Progressive further alleged that the vehicle would not qualify as an “additional auto” because Defendant had owned it for nearly three years but had never sought coverage from Progressive for it.
Standard of Review
When a defendant has failed to plead or defend, a district court may enter judgment by default. Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(2).
Analysis
The federal Declaratory Judgment Act limits relief to actual cases or controversies. That is, under the facts alleged, there must be a substantial continuing controversy between parties having adverse legal interests. In order to demonstrate that there is a case or controversy that satisfied Article III's standing requirement when a plaintiff is seeking declaratory relief - as opposed to seeking damages for past harm - the plaintiff must allege facts from which it appears that there is a substantial likelihood that he will suffer injury in the future.
These allegations, which are now admitted based on Defendant's default, are sufficient to establish that Progressive does not have liability insurance coverage duties either to defend or indemnify Defendant under the Alabama Auto Policy issued to Defendant, Policy No. 937522831.
Conclusion:
The court concluded that Progressive does not owe any liability insurance coverage duties to defend or indemnify the Defendant in the underlying case.
The Clerk of Court entered default on December 17, 2024. On that same date, a Notice of Ability to Request Pro Bono Counsel was issued to Defendant. This notice provided that Defendant had thirty (30) days from the date of the notice to request appointment of pro bono counsel. Despite this notice, Defendant has not filed a request for appointment of pro bono counsel or otherwise responded to this action.
For the reasons explained above, Progressive's Motion for Default Judgment granted.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance, as I have said often, is a contract just like any other contract. The Progressive contract provides coverage only for accidents that occur with a vehicle identified in the policy as an insured vehicle. The Nissan Pathfinder was not identified on the policy and, therefore, judgment was entered in favor of Progressive who owed nothing to the Defendant.
(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.
Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe
Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg
Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk
-
8:29
Insurance Law
5 days agoThe Dick Law Firm and its Client Sanctioned
20 -
8:01
MattMorseTV
13 hours ago $10.89 earnedHe's ACTUALLY doing it...
74.8K69 -
33:25
Uncommon Sense In Current Times
16 hours ago $2.78 earnedHollywood’s Woke Agenda Exposed | Kevin Sorbo on Cancel Culture, Faith & the Common Sense Revolution
23.2K -
8:23
The Art of Improvement
20 hours ago $1.25 earned7 Smart Habits to Boost Mental Clarity
8.58K3 -
12:09
China Uncensored
11 hours agoI Have NEVER Been More Furious
10K19 -
2:12
WildCreatures
4 days ago $1.14 earnedThe beauty and mystery of the Pantanal, Brazil's best secret
11.2K2 -
9:38
Millionaire Mentor
19 hours agoBernie Sanders LOSES IT After Scott Bessent’s Shocking Comeback
8.42K10 -
1:35:35
Dialogue works
1 day ago $0.96 earnedLarry C. Johnson & Paul Craig Roberts: Trump’s Plan COLLAPSES as Russia Strikes — Xi & Modi Rise!
7.42K3 -
14:09
Zoufry
2 days agoThe Hunt for The Biggest Art Thief in US History
10.4K3 -
29:23
DeVory Darkins
1 day ago $15.46 earnedTrump makes BOMBSHELL Announcement as Democrat Judge issues SHOCKING Order
31.1K174