JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — In a significant ruling, a Missouri appellate court has affirmed a $28 million jury award in a class-action lawsuit involving Kansas City Life Insurance Co. The case centers on disputes over the way universal life insurance policies’ values were calculated, potentially affecting numerous policyholders. Additionally, the court has remanded the matter back to trial court to address the issue of prejudgment interest, which could substantially increase the compensation owed to affected class members.
The appellate court’s decision stems from a lawsuit titled Karr v. Kansas City Life Insurance Co., where plaintiffs led by David B. Karr argued that the insurance company improperly diminished the monthly cash values of their life insurance policies. This reduction was reportedly done through inflated monthly deductions, which included a “cost of insurance” charge and a “monthly expense charge.”
Initially, while the Jackson County Circuit Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs to the tune of $28.3 million, it did not award prejudgment interest – typically given as the interest on a monetary award from the time the harm occurred until a judgment is entered. Karr’s team appealed this decision, leading to the recent appellate ruling.
In her opinion, Missouri Court of Appeals Judge Cynthia L. Martin overturned the lower court’s decision on prejudgment interest. She found that the damages were indeed liquidated, or fixed and determined, countering the trial court’s earlier stance that considered them unliquidated due to disagreements over calculations during the trial.
The appellate court specified that policyholders were entitled to prejudgment interest calculated at the contractual rate stipulated in their policies from the dates they were terminated or surrendered and continuing up until the final judgment. The plaintiffs’ lawsuit had notably stipulated that calculations should start from these crucial dates, arguing that the figures for breach of contract damages were clearly ascertainable.
Moreover, the court dismissed Kansas City Life Insurance Co.’s counterargument that an award of prejudgment interest would result in double recovery. It clarified that the expert’s calculation of class-wide damages rightly included such interest. The defense had argued during the trial that damages should be based on mortality assumptions tied to product pricing, but this was critiqued as the data used was not generated for this specific purpose.
Judge Martin highlighted that under the policies, Kansas City Life was obligated to credit interest on the cash value balances at a designated rate. However, because an excessively high cost of insurance rate was being deducted each month, policyholders’ cash value balances were lower than they should have been. This resulted in plaintiffs incurring damages both from the overstatements of cost and from the lost interest earnings.
As the case heads back to the trial court to calculate the exact figures for prejudgment interest, the implications are significant not only for the plaintiffs but potentially for others involved in similar contractual disputes with insurance providers.
Attorneys involved in the case, Patrick Stueve of Stueve Siegel Hanson in Kansas City representing the plaintiffs, and Traci Martinez of Squire Patton Boggs in Columbus, Ohio representing Kansas City Life Insurance, have not publicly commented on the appellate court’s ruling.
This case not only underscores the complexities of insurance contract disputes but also sets a precedent in how prejudgment interest might be approached in similar future cases within Missouri and possibly beyond.