The Ellis Canning Company v. International Harvester Company
174 Kan. 357, 255 P.2d 658 (1953)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When an insured has been fully compensated by an insurer for a loss caused by a third party, the insurer is the sole real party in interest and is the only party who may bring a subrogation action against the tortfeasor.
Facts:
- Ellis-Cannon a partnership owned a tractor.
- Thompson was hired to perform service on the tractor.
- While servicing the vehicle, Thompson allegedly started a fire in the tractor through negligence.
- The tractor sustained damages totaling $479.79.
- Ellis-Cannon held an insurance policy with The Potomac Insurance Company that included a subrogation clause.
- The Potomac Insurance Company paid Ellis-Cannon the full amount of the loss, $479.79.
Procedural Posture:
- Ellis-Cannon a partnership sued Thompson in a state trial court, bringing the action in its own name for the use and benefit of its insurer, The Potomac Insurance Company.
- Thompson filed an amended answer arguing that because Ellis-Cannon was fully compensated, the insurance company was the real party in interest and Ellis-Cannon could not maintain the action.
- Ellis-Cannon filed a motion to strike this defense from the answer and also filed a demurrer, challenging its legal sufficiency.
- The trial court overruled both the motion to strike and the demurrer, siding with Thompson.
- Ellis-Cannon, as the appellant, appealed the trial court's rulings to the Supreme Court of Kansas.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is an insured who has been fully compensated by their insurer for a loss the 'real party in interest' entitled to bring an action in their own name, for the use and benefit of the insurer, against the third party allegedly responsible for the loss?
Opinions:
Majority - Parker, J.
No. An insured who has been fully paid for their loss is not the real party in interest and cannot maintain an action to recover the amount of such loss in their own name for the use and benefit of the insurer. The Kansas statute (G.S. 1949, 60-401) requires that every action be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. Once an insured has been fully reimbursed, they are no longer directly interested in the subject matter of the litigation. The right of action against the alleged wrongdoer vests wholly in the insurer through subrogation. Therefore, the insurer is the real and only party in interest and must bring the action in its own name. The court explicitly overrules its prior contrary decision in Hume v. McGinnis and disapproves of similar holdings in City of New York Ins. Co. v. Tice, thereby resolving a conflict in its own precedent.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the 'real party in interest' rule in Kansas for insurance subrogation cases, creating a bright-line test based on full compensation. It resolves prior inconsistencies in Kansas case law by mandating that once an insurer makes an insured whole, the insurer must pursue the subrogation claim in its own name. This prevents insurers from suing under the name of the potentially more sympathetic insured party, thereby promoting transparency in litigation and clarifying for defendants who the actual plaintiff is.
Unlock the full brief for The Ellis Canning Company v. International Harvester Company