Jury Awards $3.22 Million to Pennsylvania Man and Wife After GEICO Denied Full Underinsured Motorist Benefits

On July 6, 2012, Ronnie Kirkpatrick was injured in a car accident in Butler County, Pennsylvania. The other driver was solely at fault. That driver carried only $100,000 in liability coverage, which his insurer paid in full. The problem was that Kirkpatrick's injuries went well beyond $100,000 in damages.

Kirkpatrick and his wife, Michelle Vensel, had purchased underinsured motorist coverage through GEICO Casualty Company with a $900,000 limit specifically to cover a situation like this. They filed a claim seeking compensation for Kirkpatrick's lost earning capacity from their vintage vehicle restoration business, along with pain and suffering, embarrassment and humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and Vensel's loss of consortium. GEICO resisted paying full benefits, and the couple filed suit in federal court.

The case went to trial in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. Joshua P. Geist of Goodrich and Geist, P.C. represented the plaintiffs. GEICO disputed the claimed damages on multiple grounds, arguing that Kirkpatrick's pack-a-week smoking habit should have been admitted into evidence to suggest a health alternative explanation for his condition, and contending that he could not recover lost earning capacity because the vintage car restoration business had operated at a loss before the accident.

The jury rejected GEICO's defenses. It returned a verdict of $3.22 million in total, allocating $2.97 million to Kirkpatrick and $250,000 to Vensel for loss of consortium. Because that award exceeded the $900,000 policy limit, the parties stipulated to mold the judgment down to the coverage cap: $830,160 to Kirkpatrick and $69,840 to Vensel.

GEICO appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, renewing its arguments about the smoking evidence and the pre-accident business losses. On April 22, 2020, a panel of Judges McKee, Ambro, and Phipps affirmed the district court judgment in full. The Third Circuit found no reversible error in the evidentiary rulings and upheld the jury's finding that Kirkpatrick was entitled to recover lost earning capacity from the restoration business despite its prior operating losses.