Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Cooper v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., No. E047002

By FindLaw Staff on September 18, 2009 1:21 PM

In plaintiff's suit against his insurance company for disposing of evidence that was to be used against a tire manufacturer in a product liability suit, trial court's grant of defendant's motion for nonsuit is reversed where: 1) plaintiff set forth a prima facie case that he relied to his detriment on State Farm's promise to preserve the tire; 2) plaintiff's opening statement referred to sufficient prima facie evidence to create a strong inference that the tire was defective and had it not been destroyed, plaintiff would have been able to prove his case against the tire manufacturer; 3) under the present facts, plaintiff's damages are reasonably ascertainable; and 4) plaintiff's pleadings, in conjunction with his opening statement, encompass the legal concepts of promissory estoppel and/or a voluntary undertaking by State Farm.      

Read Cooper v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., No. E047002

Appellate Information

Filed September 17, 2009


Opinion by Judge King


For Appellant: McCune Wright, Richard D. McCune and Kristy M. Arevalo

For Appelle:  Berger Kahn, Sherman M. Spitz, David B. Ezra, and Jeffrey S. Crowe

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard

Find a Lawyer

More Options