Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Insurance Coverage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Dispute over ‘deemed admissions’ leaves partial MSJ in Vance v. State Farm unresolved
Summary
Plaintiff pressed for partial summary judgment based on deemed requests for admission establishing uninsured/underinsured coverage; State Farm argued the admission language was ambiguous because the policy was a North Carolina form distinguishing uninsured from underinsured coverage. Judge Hayward took the matter under consideration.
Plaintiff sought a partial summary judgment in Lavina Vance's case to establish that State Farm had uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage limits of $30,000/$60,000 by operation of deemed admissions. Plaintiff's counsel argued State Farm failed to respond to requests for admissions served on 09/11/2025 and therefore the matters are conclusively established.
"By failing to respond timely, those admissions are admitted as a matter of law," plaintiff counsel (Callahanby) told the court. Frank Gaither, appearing for State Farm, disputed the effect of the deemed admissions, arguing they are ambiguous because the policies at issue are North Carolina forms that treat uninsured and underinsured coverage as separate products, unlike Georgia's combined coverage approach. Gaither contended that request number 8 is ambiguous as written and therefore not conclusively established.
Judge Hayward asked counsel to identify controlling case law on how a contract that contradicts a deemed admission should be handled and said she would consider the arguments before issuing a ruling.
