Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Dispute at court focuses on PRIMatic accounting and whether Weston's family purchased coverage before crash
Summary
Weston’s counsel argued that three undisputed facts — a December billing, a $158.92 payment, and the PRIMatic agreement’s indemnity provision — compelled a finding of coverage for Jared Weston on Feb. 15, 2004; Farmers and PRIMatic disputed whether payments were forwarded and whether the policy was canceled correctly.
Counsel for Jared Weston told the Utah Supreme Court that three facts in the record compelled coverage for Weston on Feb. 15, 2004: a December 14, 2003 billing notice stating that paying $158.92 would buy coverage for Jan. 18–Feb. 17; the undisputed acceptance and cashing of a $158.92 payment; and a PRIMatic contract provision promising to forward collected funds to Farmers Insurance to extend coverage.
"Three undisputed facts compel a conclusion of coverage for Jared," Weston’s counsel said at argument, explaining that PRIMatic’s agreement included an express indemnity promise that required PRIMatic to indemnify a customer if PRIMatic failed to forward collected funds…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
