AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The plaintiff, Edwin Wilson, was paralyzed below the waist after being shot during a comedy show at the Lodge. Prior to the incident, the Lodge had sought to procure a general liability insurance policy through Berger Briggs, which resulted in a policy excluding coverage for assault, battery, and firearm incidents. After the shooting, Wilson filed a complaint for personal injuries against the Lodge and others. The Lodge then assigned all claims it had against Berger Briggs and related entities to Wilson, who subsequently filed suit against Berger Briggs for various claims including negligent failure to procure adequate insurance coverage (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• District Court, February 22, 2016: The Lodge stipulated to liability and assigned all claims against Berger Briggs to Wilson, who was awarded damages of $14,502,807.69 (para 4).
• District Court, July 16, 2019: Denied Berger Briggs' motion for summary judgment on all claims due to unassignability (para 5).

Parties' Submissions

• Berger Briggs: Argued that the claims assigned to Wilson were unassignable as they were personal in nature and that there was no assignable contract between itself and the Lodge. Additionally, contended that the Unfair Practices Act (UPA) prohibits the claims from being assigned and that the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) does not support the assignment (paras 6, 15, 22).
• Wilson: Contended that the Lodge’s claims against Berger Briggs, including claims of negligent failure to procure the requested coverage and negligent misrepresentation, are contract and commercial tort claims and thus assignable. Wilson also argued that he has standing to allege claims under the UPA as the assignee of the Lodge’s claims (paras 6, 22).

Legal Issues

• Whether the Lodge’s commercial tort, breach of contract, and statutory violation claims were validly assigned to Wilson (para 6).
• Whether Wilson has standing to allege UPA claims (para 22).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s denial of Berger Briggs' motion for summary judgment, holding that the claims at issue are commercial in nature, were validly assigned to Wilson, and therefore Wilson is not barred from asserting such claims against Berger Briggs (para 29).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, per Chief Judge Hanisee, with Judges Medina and Yohalem concurring, held that under New Mexico law, the claims at issue are commercial in nature and were validly assigned to Wilson. The court distinguished between personal injury claims, which are not assignable, and commercial disputes, which are. It found that the claims arose from a business relationship between the Lodge and Berger Briggs, thus falling into the category of commercial tort claims. The court also determined that an implied-in-fact contract existed between the Lodge and Berger Briggs for the procurement of insurance quotes, supporting the assignability of the claims. Furthermore, the court held that Wilson, as the assignee of the Lodge’s claims, has standing to allege claims under the UPA, rejecting Berger Briggs' argument that UPA claims are limited to actual consumers of goods and services (paras 6-28).