LACV - Terry Campbell Et Al vs. Rambang Et Al - Suit Over Collision Dismissed

E-FILED 2013 MAR 21 2:37 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 MAR 28 10:02 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
E-FILED 2013 MAR 28 11:14 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL AND
ROXANNE CAMPBELL,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBANG,
JACOB TUT LIECH and PROGRESSIVE
NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

CASE NO. LACV019416

NOTICE OF WORKERS
COMPENSATION LIEN PURSUANT TO
IOWA CODE 85.22

COME NOW Plaintiffs employer, Farner-Bocken Company, and their Insurance
Carrier, Sentry Insurance, and for their Notice of Lien, pursuant to Iowa Code 85.22, hereby
state as follows:
1. That Plaintiffs employer and their insurance carrier have been provided with
notice of the above-captioned matter by Plaintiffs counsel.
2. The above-captioned matter arises out of a March 25, 2011 accident in which
Plaintiff sustained injuries while on the job for his employer, Farner-Bocken Company.
3. That Plaintiffs employer and their insurance carrier have paid workers'
compensation benefits to the Plaintiff as a result of Plaintiffs March 25, 2011 accident.
4. That Plaintiffs employer and their insurance carrier hereby file their Notice of
Workers Compensation lien in the above-captioned matter as required by the provisions of Iowa
Code 85.22(1).
5. That Plaintiffs employer and their insurance carrier state that pursuant to their
Notice of Lien filed herein, that they shall be indemnified out of the recovery of damages in the
above-captioned matter to the extent of the payment made, with legal interest, in an amount
E-FILED 2013 APR 22 2:42 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
totaling all workers' compensation benefits paid to Plaintiff, Terry Allen Campbell, following the
judgment or settlement, if any, of the above-captioned lawsuit.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs employer, Farner-Bocken Company, and their insurance
carrier, Sentry Insurance, respectively request that the court in the above-captioned matter take
notice of the lien pursuant to the provisions of Iowa Code 85.22.
PEDDICORD, WHARTON, SPENCER,
HOOK, BARRON & WEGMAN, L.L.P.
/s/
Mark A. Bosscher, AT0000998
6800 Lake Drive, Suite 125
West Des Moines, IA 50266
Phone/Fax: 515-243-2100 / 515-243-1925
E-mail: Mark.Bosscher@Peddicord-Law.com
ATTORNEY FOR EMPLOYER
AND INSURANCE CARRIER

Original filed.
Copy to:

Sheldon M. Gallner
300 West Broadway, Suite 145
Council Bluffs, IA 51503
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS
PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was served
upon all parties to the above cause to each of the attorneys of record
herein at their respective addresses disclosed on the pleadings on
___________________________, 2013, via U.S. mail.

Signature: __________________________________________

E-FILED 2013 MAY 01 1:14 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
Notice ID: 2RCV18


TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL
ROXANN CAMPBELL
,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JACOB TUT LIECH
RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBANG
PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN
INSURANCE COMPANY
,
Defendant.

Case No. 02811 LACV019416

O R D E R
The Defendant has filed a Motion for Leave to Amend Answer. The motion is timely.
The granting of leave to amend is the rule and the denial thereof the exception under
the Iowa Rules of Civil Procedure. The pending motion should be granted.
IT IS, THEREFORE, THE ORDER OF THE COURT as follows:
1. The above-described Motion for Leave to Amend Answer is granted.
2. The answer filed by the Defendant is deemed amended in the form which was
attached to the
above-described motion.
1 of 2
E-FILED 2013 MAY 06 9:33 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
State of Iowa Courts
Case Number Case Title
LACV019416 TERRY CAMPBELL ET AL VS. RAMBANG ET AL
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered
Electronically signed on 2013-05-06 09:33:44
2 of 2
Notice ID: 2RCV31

ROXANN CAMPBELL
,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JACOB TUT LIECH
INSURANCE COMPANY
,
Defendant.

ORDER SETTING HEARING

The Defendant Rambang has filed a Motion to Dismiss. A hearing will now be
scheduled.

1. A Hearing is scheduled on 06/04/2013 at 10:30 AM at the Sac Co. Courthouse,
100 NW State St., Sac City, Iowa.

If you need assistance to participate in court due to a disability, call the disability coordinator at
641-421-0990. Persons who are hearing or speech impaired may call Relay Iowa TTY (1-800-735-2942).
Disablity coordinators cannot provide legal advice.

1 of 2
Type: ORDER SETTING HEARING
So Ordered
2 of 2


TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, )
and ROXANN CAMPBELL, ) LAW NO. LACV0191!
)
P"a#n$#%%&, )
)
'&. )
) ORDER (RANTIN( RAMBAN()S
RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBAN(, ) MOTION TO DISMISS
*ACOB TUT LIECH, and PRO(RESSIVE )
NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY, )
)
D+%+ndan$&. )

T,+ D+%+ndan$ Ra-.an/ %#"+d a M0$#0n $0 D#&-#&& 0n Ma1 !, 2013. An O4d+4 S+$$#n/
H+a4#n/ %04 $,+ M0$#0n $0 D#&-#&& 5a& +n$+4+d 0n Ma1 6, 2013. T,+ ,+a4#n/ 5a& &7,+d8"+d %04
*8n+ , 2013 a$ 10930 a.-. a$ $,+ Sa7 C08n$1 C084$,08&+. Pa$4#7: L. S+a"+1 a;;+a4+d
$+"+;,0n#7a""1 0n .+,a"% 0% R+7,0" N1an$,a- Ra-.an/. P"a#n$#%%& ,a'+ n0$ %#"+d a R+&#&$an7+ $0
$,+ M0$#0n. T,+ M0$#0n #& $,+4+.1 /4an$+d.

E-FILED 2013 JUN 05 9:42 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered
Electronically signed on 2013-06-05 09:42:34 page 2 of 2
Notice Id: 2CA004

ROXANN CAMPBELL
,

Plaintiff / Petitioner,

vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH
PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE
COMPANY
,

Defendant / Respondent.

Notice of Civil Trial Setting Conference

Case No: 02811 LACV019416

A scheduling conference will be held on 06/19/13 at 09:30 AM with Kellie Orres, as District Court
Designee, pursuant to I.R.C.P 1.602.

This conference shall be conducted by telephone conference call initiated by plaintiff's counsel.
Kellie Orres may be contacted via telephone at: (515) 574-3752.

1. PARTICIPATION: All attorneys appearing in the case shall participate in this conference. A party
who is not represented by counsel shall contact the Court Administrator's office (at the above phone
number) prior to the date and time of the conference call.

2. TRIAL SCHEDULING: A firm trial date shall be established in accordance with the Supreme
Court's time standards as provided by Chapter 23, Iowa Court Rules. NO CONTINUANCES SHALL
BE GRANTED EXCEPT BY COURT ORDER, UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN.

3. SANCTIONS: If a party or attorney fails to participate in the scheduling conference or is
substantially unprepared to participate in the conference, the Court may impose appropriate
sanctions, including reasonable expenses and attorney fees. (I.R.C.P 1.602(5)).

/s/ Kellie Orres
---------------------------------------
Designee of the Court

Clerk to provide copies or
notice of document to attorneys
of record and parties appearing
pro se.

E-FILED 2013 JUN 06 10:57 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURTRecipient List
Case ID : 02811 LACV019416 - TERRY CAMPBELL ET AL VS.
RAMBANG ET AL
Event Cd : OFTN
MARK ALAN BOSSCHER filed
PATRICK L SEALEY filed
THOMP JOHN PATTERMANN filed
Notice Id: 2CA010
IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY

ROXANN CAMPBELL

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH
PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant(s).

Trial Scheduling Order

Case No : 02811 LACV019416

Date Petition Filed : 03/21/13

Case Type : Civil

Trial Type : Jury

Expected Length of Trial : 3 Days

The amount in controversy exceeds $10,000 : Yes

Nature of Case : PI

APPEARANCES:
Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner(s) : TJ Patterman
Defendant(s)/Respondent(s) : Patrick Sealey Randy Wilharber

IT IS SO ORDERED:

TRIAL : Trial of this case is set for trial on 05/28/14 at 09:00 AM in the District Court in the courthouse
of the above-named county.

PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE (Check one)
A pre-trial conference shall be held on The conference may be held telephonically with prior
approval of the court.
A pre-trial conference shall be held upon request.

NEW PARTIES. No new parties may be added later than 180 days before trial or .

TRANSCRIPTS AND RECORDS. All required agency records and prior criminal transcipts shall be
filed within 30 days of the date of this order or by .

PLEADINGS. Pleadings shall be closed 60 days before trial or .

DISCOVERY. All written discovery shall be served no later than 90 days before trial. All depositions
shall be completed no later than 60 days before trial. Or, all discovery shall be completed by .

EXPERT WITNESS.
a. A party who intends to call an expert witness, including rebuttal expert witnesses, shall certfiy to
the court and all other parties the expert's name, subject matter of expertise and qualifications, within
the following time period, unless the Iowa Code requires an earlier designation (See, e.g. Iowa Code
668.11):

(1) Plaintiff: 210 days before trial or .
(2) Defendant/Third Party Plaintiff: 150 days before trial or .
(3) Third-Party Defendant/Others/Rebuttal: 90 days before trial or .

b. This section does not apply to court appointed experts.

(The pleadings, discovery, and expert witness deadlines may be amended, without further leave of court, by
filing a Stipulated Amendment to Scheduling Order with the clerk listing the dates agreed upon and signed by all
counsel and self-represented litigants. Such an Amendment shall not serve as a basis for a continuance of the
trial date or affect the date for pre-trial submissions.)

PRE-TRIAL SUBMISSIONS. At least seven (7) days before trial, counsel for the parties and self-
represented litigants shall:

a. File a witness and exhibit list with the clerk, serve a copy on opposing counsel and self-
represented litigants and exchange exhibits. Rules governing exhibits and exhibit lists:
(1) Plaintiff shall use numbers and Defendant shall use letters. Pre-trial exhibit lists shall identify
each exhibit by letter or number and description. Exhibits shall be marked by counsel before trial.
(2) Immediately before commencement of trial, the court shall be provided with a bench copy,
and the reporter with a second copy, of the final exhibit list, for use in recording the admission of
evidence.
(3) In non-jury cases, immediately before commencement of trial, the court shall be provided with
a bench copy of all exhibits identified on the exhibit lists.
(4) Within 5 days after the filing of an exhibit list, counsel and self-represented litigants shall file
with the clerk, and serve on each party, any identification, authentication, and foundation objections to
the exhibits listed; otherwise such objections shall be deem WAIVED for trial purposes.

b. File with the clerk, and deliver to the Trial Judge, Motions in Limine, with supporting legal
authority.

c. File with the clerk, and deliver to the Trial Judge, all proposed jury instructions in a form to be
presented to the jury, including a statement of the case, the stock jury instruction numbers and verdict
forms. (The court shall be provided the instructions in written form and by either E-mail attachment;
USB Thumb drive download; or on a CD-ROM with MS Word compatible format.)

d. Deliver to the Trial Judge and opposing counsel/self-represented litigants a concise trial brief
addressing factual, legal and evidentiary issues, with a citation to legal authorities.

MOTIONS. All motions, including motions for summary judgment and except motions in limine, shall
be filed with the clerk of court's office at least 60 days before trial, with copies to the assigned judge.

SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE. (Check one)
A settlement conference shall be held on . All parties with authority to settle must be present.
A settlement conference may be held upon request.

SETTLEMENTS. The parties shall have the responsibility of immediately notifying the court
administrator of settlement.

LATE SETTLEMENT FEES. Late settlement fees under Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.909 are
applicable.

CONTINUANCES. Continuances are discouraged and shall only be granted for good cause.
Motions to continue are governed by Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.910. In the event the trial date is
continued, all time deadlines in this order and stipulated amendments shall remain in effect relative to
the new trial date unless the court approves new deadlines.

NOTICE. A failure to comply with any of the provisions of this order or an amendment to scheduling order
may result in sanctions being imposed by the court pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.602(5) including
limitation and exclusion of evidence and witnesses and payment of costs or attorney fees. The original of
this order shall be filed at the time the trial date is obtained. The court shall resolve disputes regarding oral
agreements on scheduling by reference to this scheduling order or any written amendments to this order.

Dated : 06/19/13
/s/ Kellie Orres
________________________________
Judge of the District Court/Court Designee

Original filed with the Clerk of Court
Copies to: counsel of record/self-represented litigants/assigned judge.
E-FILED 2013 JUN 19 11:41 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURTRecipient List
Case ID : 02811 LACV019416 - TERRY CAMPBELL ET AL VS.
RAMBANG ET AL
Event Cd : OSTR
MARK ALAN BOSSCHER filed
PATRICK L SEALEY filed
THOMP JOHN PATTERMANN filed
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR SAC COUNTY

TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, an
individual, and ROXANN CAMPBELL,
an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH, and
INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

APPEARANCE ON BEHALF OF
DEFENDANT PROGRESSIVE
NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY

COMES NOW Randy J. Wilharber, of the law firm of Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer,
Hook, Barron & Wegman, L.L.P., and hereby enters his Appearance on behalf of the Defendant,
Progressive Northern Insurance Company, in the above-captioned cause of action.
PEDDICORD, WHARTON, SPENCER, HOOK,
BARRON & WEGMAN, LLP

/s/ Randy J. Wilharber_____________
Randy J. Wilharber AT0008505
Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
Randy.Wilharber@Peddicord-Law.com
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
COMPANY
Original E-Filed
Copy to:

T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann
Gallner & Pattermann, P.C.
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 26, 2013, I electronically
Filed this document with the Clerk of Court using the
Electronic Filing system which will serve it on the
appropriate parties.

Signature: /s/ Randy J. Wilharber_____________

2

Patrick Sealey
Heidman Law Firm, L.L.P.
1128 Historic Fourth Street
PO Box 3086
Sioux City, IA 51102-3086
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS
RAMBANG AND LIECH


an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
AND JURY DEMAND ON BEHALF OF

COMES NOW the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company (hereinafter
Progressive), by and through its attorneys, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer, Hook, Barron &
Wegman, LLP, and for its answer to Plaintiffs Petition at Law, hereby states as follows:
I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. Defendant Progressive acknowledges Plaintiffs filing of a civil action arising
from a motor vehicle collision on March 25, 2011.
II. JURISDICTION
2. The allegations contained in paragraph 2 are denied for lack of information.
III. PARTIES
7. The allegations contained in paragraph 7 are admitted.
2
IV. STATEMENT OF THE CLAIM
9. The allegations contained in paragraph 9 are denied for lack of information
including subparagraphs a. - f.
V. INJURIES
VI. DAMAGES
VII. JURY DEMAND
16. Defendant Progressive acknowledges Plaintiffs request for trial by jury.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1. By way of further answer and affirmative defense, Defendant Progressive states
and alleges that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim against this Defendant upon which relief
may be granted.
and alleges that Plaintiffs damages, if any, may be compensated for by available policy limits
issued to Defendants Liech and/or Rambang, or otherwise by assets available to Defendants
Liech and/or Rambang.
3
and alleges that Plaintiffs may bear comparative fault, which fault was a proximate cause of
Plaintiffs alleged injuries and/or damages, and should be compared as to all other parties to this
suit pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 668.
and alleges that Plaintiffs injuries and/or damages, if any, may have been caused or contributed
to by the acts or omissions of persons, entities or forces over which this Defendant exercised no
authority or control.
and alleges that Plaintiffs injuries and/or damages, if any, may have been caused by a pre-
existing medical condition and/or a subsequently occurring medical condition for which this
Defendant is not responsible.
and alleges that Plaintiffs may have failed to mitigate his claimed medical injuries, and therefore,
bears comparative fault pursuant to Iowa Code Chapter 668.
WHEREFORE, Defendant Progressive prays the Court dismiss Plaintiffs Petition at
Law, and assess all costs associated therewith upon the Plaintiffs, along with other relief as the
Court deems just and proper.
JURY DEMAND
COMES NOW the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company, by and through
its attorneys, and hereby requests trial by jury on all issues of the within cause of action.

4
Respectfully submitted,


Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

PROOF OF SERVICE




an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANYS
MOTION TO SEVER

COMES NOW the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company, by and
through its attorneys, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer, Hook, Barron & Wegman, LLP, and for its
Motion to Sever pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.914, hereby states to the Court as
follows:
1. This action was commenced by the filing of Plaintiffs Petition at Law on March
21, 2013.
2. The facts and circumstances of Plaintiffs Petition at Law involve a motor vehicle
accident.
3. The Plaintiffs are seeking damages from alleged tortfeasors Rechol Nyantham
Rambang and Jacob Tut Liech allegedly sustained by them as a result of the incident motor
vehicle accident.
4. The Plaintiffs, in the same Petition, are also seeking underinsurance motorist
benefits from Defendant Progressive.
2
5. It would be prejudicial not only to Defendant Progressive, but to Defendants
Rambang and Liech, to allow an insurance company to remain a party to the underlying action,
thereby resulting in the interjection of insurance into the lawsuit.
6. The inclusion of Progressive as a Defendant to the underlying action at hand will
allow evidence of insurance to be presented to the jury, which may result in a jury awarding
excessive damages.
7. Pursuant to the Iowa Supreme Court ruling in Handley v. Farm Bureau Mutual
Insurance Company, 467 N.W.2d 247 (Iowa 1991), the Court in this situation, should provide
for a separate trial of the claims against Defendant Progressive to avoid prejudice to all
Defendants involved in this case.
8. An order from the Court granting this Motion to Sever will not prejudice the
rights of any of the parties to this action.
9. Defendant Progressive acknowledges that absent issues of collusion, jury
tampering, or matters of insubstantial defense, it will be bound to the underlying verdict. Wilson
v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., 714 N.W.2d 250, 258 (Iowa 2006).
WHEREFORE, Defendant Progressive Northern Insurance Company requests the Court
grant its Motion to Sever, and that the trial date for the case against the Defendant Progressive
Northern Insurance Company be set to commence at a date after completion of the trial of the
Plaintiffs case against Defendants Rambang and Liech.
3

Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed

Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

PROOF OF SERVICE




an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

NOTICE OF SERVICE OF DISCOVERY

COMES NOW the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company, and gives
notice of the service of Interrogatories to Plaintiff Terry Campbell (numbers 1 30), Defendants
Interrogatories to Plaintiff Roxann Campbell (numbers 1 7) and Defendants Request for
Production to Plaintiff (numbers 1 18) on June 26, 2013.
Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY
Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann
2

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

PROOF OF SERVICE


Signature: /s/ Randy J. Wilharber_________________

E-FILED 2013 JUL 02 2:56 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Page 1 of 2
(mrr)


TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL a! ) LAW NO"# LAC$ %1&'1(
I!)*+*),a-. a!) RO/ANN CAMPBELL )
a! I!)*+*),a- )
)
P-a*!0*ff1 )
)
+1" ) ORDER TO AMEND PETITION
) AT LAW AND JURY DEMAND
RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBAN2 )
3ACOB TUT LIECH a!) PRO2RESSI$E )
NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY )
)
Defe!)a!01" )

NOW ON THIS 4
r)
)a5 of 3,-5 2%14 06e Co,r0 6a+*!g re+*e7e) P-a*!0*ff1 Terr5
A--e! Cam89e-- a!) Ro:a!! Cam89e--;1 (6ere*!af0er <P-a*!0*ff1 Cam89e--=) Mo0*o! 0o Ame!)
Pe0*0*o! a0 La7 a!) 3,r5 Dema!) f*!)1 06a0 a! Or)er 0o Ame!) Pe0*0*o! a0 La7 a!) 3,r5
Dema!) *! 06*1 a>0*o! 0o a)) Se!0r5 Ca1,a-05 Com8a!5 a1 a Defe!)a!0 *1 a88ro8r*a0e"
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED 06a0 P-a*!0*ff1
Cam89e-- 16a-- 9e a--o7e) 0o a)) Se!0r5 Ca1,a-05 Com8a!5 a1 a Defe!)a!0"

????????????????????????????????????????????????
3,)ge of 06e 2
!)
3,)*>*a- D*10r*>0

Pre8are) a!) S,9m*00e) 95#

T" 3" Pa00erma!! @ AAT%%%(%2B
LAW OFFICES OF 2ALLNER C PATTERMANN P"C"
S,*0e 1'D
4%% We10 Broa)7a5
Co,!>*- B-,ff1 Io7a D1D%4

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL AN INDI$IDUAL. AND
RO/ANN CAMPBELL AN INDI$IDUAL

E-FILED 2013 JUL 03 8:23 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

Page 2 of 2
(mrr)

Co8*e1 0o#

T" 3" Pa00erma!! $*a E@Ma*- a0# 0E8a00erma!!F1ga--!er-a7">om
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL AN INDI$IDUAL. AND
RO/ANN CAMPBELL AN INDI$IDUAL

Pa0r*>G Sea-e5 $*a E@Ma*- a0# Pa0r*>G"Sea-e5F6e*)ma!-a7">om
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 3ACOB TUT LIECH

Ra!)5 3" W*-6ar9er $*a E@Ma*- a0# Ra!)5"W*-6ar9erFPe))*>or)@La7">om
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT PRO2RESSI$E NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered

TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL and )
ROXANN CAMPBELL, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) No LAC!"#$%#&
)
's ) O(d)(
)
REC*OL NYANT*AMRAMBAN+, )
,ACOB TUT LIEC* and )
PRO+RESSI!E NORT*ERN )
INSURANCE COMPANY, )
)
D)f)ndant )

D)f)ndant ,a-o. T/t Li)-0 0as fil)d a Motion to Co12)l 3No
San-tions R)4/)st)d5 D)f)ndant stat)s t0at 0) fil)d Int)((o6ato(i)s and R)4/)st
fo( P(od/-tion of Do-/1)nts on o( a.o/t Ma7 #, 8"#9 Plaintiffs :)() to ()s2ond
to dis-o')(7 on o( a.o/t ,/n) 9 ./t :)() 6(ant)d an );t)nsion to ()s2ond to ,/l7
#, 8"#9 To dat), D)f)ndant 0as ()-)i')d no dis-o')(7 ()s2ons)s
IT IS ORDERED t0at t0) D)f)ndant<s Motion to Co12)l is
s/stain)d T0) Plaintiffs a() di()-t)d to ans:)( t0) D)f)ndant<s int)((o6ato(i)s
and s)(') a -o27 of t0os) ans:)(s /2on t0) D)f)ndant<s atto(n)7 on o( .)fo()
July 26, 2013 If t0) ans:)(s 0a') not .))n ()-)i')d .7 -o/ns)l fo( D)f)ndant
.7 t0at dat), 0) 1a7 ()4/)st t0at a 0)a(in6 .) s-0)d/l)d /2on t0) 1otion

Cl)(= to fo(:a(d -o2i)s to>
T , Patt)(1ann
Pat(i-= L S)al)7
Rand7 , Wil0a(.)(
Ma(= A Boss-0)(
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered

an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH, PROGRESSIVE
and SENTRY CASUALTY INSURANCE,

Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

AND JURY DEMAND TO PLAINTIFFS
AMENDED PETITION AT LAW

II. JURISDICTION
III. PARTIES
2
8. Defendant Progressive makes no answer to the allegations contained in Paragraph
8 of Plaintiffs Amended Petition at Law as the same are not directed toward this Defendant.
V. INJURIES
VI. DAMAGES
VII. JURY DEMAND
may be granted.
3
JURY DEMAND
4


Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 26, 2013, I electronically



an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.


Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

AND JURY DEMAND TO PLAINTIFFS
AMENDED PETITION AT LAW

II. JURISDICTION
III. PARTIES
2
8. Defendant Progressive makes no answer to the allegations contained in Paragraph
8 of Plaintiffs Amended Petition at Law as the same are not directed toward this Defendant.
V. INJURIES
VI. DAMAGES
VII. JURY DEMAND
may be granted.
3
JURY DEMAND
4


Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on July 26, 2013, I electronically


E-FILED 2013 AUG 05 2:55 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
E-FILED 2013 SEP 12 9:21 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
E-FILED 2013 OCT 08 2:51 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.


Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COMES NOW the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company, through its
attorneys, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer, Hook, Barron & Wegman, L.L.P., and respectfully
moves this Court for an Order granting its Motion for Summary Judgment for the reasons set
forth in its separately filed Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Memorandum of
Authorities.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL CONTEXT OF MOTION
This lawsuit arises out of a March 11, 2011, motor vehicle accident in which Terry
Campbell was a passenger in a 2008 Mack semi tractor-trailer (semi) traveling northbound on
Highway 71 in Sac County, Iowa. Plaintiffs Petition, 8. The semi was allegedly struck by a
2000 Chrysler Voyager operated by Rachel Nyantham and owned by Jacob Tut Liech. See Id.
at 6, 8. At the time of the subject collision, Terry Campbell was in the course and scope of
his employment with Farner-Bocken Company. The semi in which Terry Campbell was a
passenger at the time of the collision was owned by Farner-Bocken Company.
2
The crash resulted in alleged injuries and damages to Plaintiffs Terry Campbell
(personal) and Roxann Campbell (loss of consortium). As a result, Plaintiffs filed their
underlying action against Defendants Rambang and Liech. Additionally, Plaintiffs filed claims
seeking underinsured motorist benefits from two separate insurance companies. Plaintiffs filed
an action for UIM benefits against Terry Campbells personal automobile insurer, Progressive
Northern Insurance Company (hereinafter Progressive). Plaintiffs additionally filed a claim
for underinsured motorist benefits against Sentry Casualty Company, as the insurer of the
Farner-Bocken owned Mack semi tractor-trailer on the date of loss.
There is no genuine issue of material fact that Plaintiffs claims against Progressive are
barred by the antistacking provisions of Iowa Code 516A.2(3), as well as Progressives
position as an excess insurer.
WHEREFORE, for the above-stated reasons, Defendant, Progressive Northern
Insurance Company, respectfully requests this Court enter its Order as follows:
(A) That no genuine issue of material fact exists which would permit Plaintiffs to
present a case for underinsured motorist benefits against Defendant Progressive
Northern Insurance Company;

(B) That Progressive Northern Insurance Company is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law;

(C) That Plaintiffs claims against Progressive Northern Insurance Company are
dismissed with prejudice; and

(D) For all other remedies and relief arising from, and associated with, the grant of
this Motion for Summary Judgment.

3

Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed

Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

Timothy A. Clausen
Klass Law Firm, L.L.P.
Mayfair Center Upper Level
4280 Sergeant Road, Suite 290
Sioux City, IA 51106
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT SENTRY
CASUALTY COMPANY

PROOF OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on October 23, 2013, I electronically

Signature: __/s/ Randy J. Wilharber_____________

Notice ID: 2RCV29


ROXANN CAMPBELL
,
PLAINTIFF(S),
vs.
SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY
JACOB TUT LIECH
INSURANCE COMPANY
,
DEFENDANT(S).


O R D E R
The Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company, has filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment. A hearing on that motion will now be scheduled.
1. A Hearing is scheduled on 11/18/2013 at 11:30 AM at the Sac Co. Courthouse,
2. If the parties so desire, they may participate in this hearing via conference call
to be initiated by counsel for the Defendant, Progressive Northern Insurance Company,.
The Court may be reached at 712-662-7791.

1 of 3

CLERK TO FURNISH COPIES TO:
2 of 3
So Ordered
3 of 3

an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.


Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

through its attorneys, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer, Hook, Barron & Wegman, L.L.P., and for its
Memorandum of Authorities in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment, hereby states as
follows:
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL CONTEXT OF MOTION
This lawsuit arises out of a March 11, 2011, motor vehicle accident in which Plaintiff
Terry Campbell was a passenger in 2008 Mack semi tractor-trailer owned by his employer,
Farner-Bocken Company, and Defendant Rechol Rambang, on Highway 71 in Sac County, Iowa.
At the time of the collision, Plaintiff was in the course and scope of his employment with Farner-
Bocken Company. The crash resulted in alleged personal injuries and damages to Plaintiff Terry
Campbell, as well as alleged loss of consortium damages to Plaintiff Roxann Campbell.
As a result, the Campbells filed their underlying action against Defendants Rambang and
Liech (as the vehicle owner). Additionally, Plaintiffs are seeking underinsured motorist benefits
from two separate insurance companies. Plaintiffs filed an action for UIM benefits against their
2
personal automobile insurer, Progressive Northern Insurance Company (Progressive).
Plaintiffs additionally filed a claim for UIM benefits against Sentry Casualty Company
(Sentry) as the rightful insurer of the Mack semi tractor-trailer owned by Farner-Bocken
Company on the date of loss.
There is no genuine issue of material fact that Plaintiffs claims against Progressive are
barred by the antistacking provisions of Iowa Code 516A.2(3), as well as Progressives
position as an excess insurer. There can be no dispute that any benefits sought for underinsured
motorist coverage in this case must be directed toward Sentry only.
II. MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES
A. SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS PROPER WHERE THERE EXISTS NO
FACTUAL DISPUTE

In Iowa, summary judgment is proper when the pleadings, depositions, answers to
interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with affidavits, if any, show that there is no
genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter
of law. Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.981(3).
For purposes of summary judgment, an issue of fact is material only when the dispute
involves facts which might affect the outcome of the suit, given the applicable governing law.
Wallace v. Des Moines Independent Community School Dist. Bd. of Directors, 754 N.W.2d
854, 857 (Iowa 2008). A genuine issue of fact exists when a reasonable jury could return a
verdict for the non-moving party. Id.
In seeking summary judgment, the burden is on the moving party to prove the facts are
undisputed. Kolarik v. Cory Intern. Corp., 721 N.W.2d 159, 162 (Iowa 2006). And, a non-
moving party is entitled to all reasonable inferences. Green v. Racing Assn. of Cent. Iowa,
3
713 N.W.2d 234, 236 (Iowa 2006). However, this does not relieve the non-moving party of
their duty to identify specific facts to support those inferences. Id.
B. IOWA CODE 516A.2(3) PROHIBITS PLAINTIFFS FROM PURSUING ANY
CLAIM FOR UNDERINSURED MOTORIST BENEFITS AGAINST

As detailed in Progressives Statement of Undisputed Facts, the policy issued to
Plaintiffs contains an appropriate Limits of Liability clause. See Exhibit A, pp. 12-13. Most
notably, Progressive has detailed its position as a secondary or excess insurer under the heading
Other Insurance. Specifically, Progressive states:
OTHER INSURANCE
If there is other applicable uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, the amount of
damages which an insured person is entitled to recover shall not exceed the highest limit
for uninsured motorist coverage or underinsured motorist coverage provided under any
one of the applicable policies. We will pay only our share of the damages. Our share is
the proportion that our Limit of Liability bears to the total of all available coverage
limits. However, any insurance we provide with respect to a vehicle that is not a covered
auto will be excess over any other uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage.

Id. at p. 13. (Emphasis added.)

There is no dispute in this matter that Progressive was not the insurer of the 2008 Mack
semi tractor-trailer in which Plaintiff was a passenger at the time of the subject collision. Sentry
was the insurer of Mack semi tractor-trailer. The Sentry policy issued to Farner-Bocken
Company covering the Mack semi tractor-trailer on the date of loss carried a higher policy limit
for underinsured motorist benefits than the Progressive policy issued to the Campbells. See
Exhibit B.
The interpretation of an insurance policy is a question of law for the Court to consider.
See e.g. Greenfield v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 737 N.W.2d 112, 117 (Iowa 2007). Progressive
concedes the Court is to view the provisions of an insurance policy in the light most favorable
to the insured. A.Y. McDonald Indus. v. Insurance Co. of North America, 475 N.W.2d 607,
4
618-19 (Iowa 1991) (stating the cardinal principle is that the intent of the parties must
control; and except in cases of ambiguity this is determined by what the policy itself says.)
(Emphasis added).
The above principle notwithstanding, the Iowa Supreme Court has relied on statutory law
to assist in interpreting insurance policy language and provisions. Specifically as it relates to
Iowa Code 516A, the Supreme Court has opined the statute itself forms a basic part of the
policy and is treated as if it had actually been written into the policy. Lee v. Grinnell Mut.
Reins. Co., 646 N.W.2d 403, 406 (Iowa 2002). As such, this Court must consider not only the
language of the Progressive policy, but also the statutory language of Iowa Code 516A.
Chapter 516A of the Iowa Code is titled UNISURED, UNDERINSURED, OR HIT-
AND-RUN MOTORISTS. Before the Court is interpretation of 516A.2 which controls
construction minimum coverage stacking.
Section 516A.2(1) states:
Except with respect to a policy containing both underinsured motor vehicle coverage
and uninsured or hit-and-run motor vehicle coverage, nothing contained in this chapter
shall be construed as requiring forms of coverage provided pursuant hereto, whether
alone or in combination with similar coverage afforded under other automobile liability
or motor vehicle liability policies, to afford limits in excess of those that would be afforded
had the insured thereunder been involved in an accident with a motorist who was insured
under a policy of liability insurance with the minimum limits for bodily injuryor death
prescribed in subsection 11 of section 321A.1. Such forms of coverage may include
terms, exclusions, limitations, and offsets which are designed to avoid duplication of
insurance or other benefits.

(Emphasis added). Undoubtedly, 516A.2(1) contemplates that antistacking provisions
contained within insurance policies are enforceable. The language of 516A.2(1) expressly
addresses limitations of this kind.
Pursuant to chapter 17A, the commissioner of insurance shall, by January 1, 1992,
adopt rules to assure the availability, within the state, of motor vehicle insurance
policies, riders, endorsements, or other similar forms of coverage, the terms of which
5

shall provide for the stacking of uninsured and underinsured coverages with any similar
coverage which may be available to an insured.

(Emphasis added). This subsection addresses the intent of the legislature to allow for the
option of an insured and insurer to contract for the stacking of available coverage under a
particular policy. See Iowa Code 516A.2(2). There is no requirement that an insured and
insurer contract for the stacking of insurance policies. See id. Furthermore, one should presume
that an additional premium would be paid by the insured for any agreement to allow for stacking
of coverage under separate policies.
I t is the intent of the general assemblythat when more than one motor vehicle insurance policy
is purchased by or on behalf of an injured insured and which provides uninsured,
underinsured, or hit-and-run motor vehicle coverage to an insured injured in an accident,
the insured is entitled to recover up to an amount equal to the highest single limit for
uninsured, underinsured, or hit-and-run motor vehicle coverage under any one of the above-
described motor vehicle insurance policies insuring the injured person which amount shall be
paid by the insurers according to any priority of coverage provisions contained in the policies
insuring the injured person.

(Emphasis added). This subsection is unequivocal in that relative to situations like the case at
bar where more than one policy is claimed to provide coverage to an injured insured, that person
is entitled (and generally limited) to recover up to an amount equal to the highest single limit
under any one of the policies. See Iowa Code 516A.2(3). The language of this subsection is
further unequivocal in that payment of any available coverage by the insurers is to be completed
according to any priority provisions contained within the specific policies. See Id.
There is no dispute in this case that the applicable Progressive policy does not expressly
allow for interpolicy stacking. See Exhibit A. Furthermore, as set forth more fully in
Progressives declarations page, there is no premium amount noted, nor coverage listed, which
6
would suggest that Plaintiffs and Progressive contracted for interpolicy stacking. See Id.
Progressives policy is therefore silent on this issue. As such, the Iowa Supreme Courts ruling
in Mortensen v. Heritage Mutual Insurance Company is controlling. 590 N.W.2d 35, 39
(1999).
In Mortensen, the Iowa Supreme Court stated:
In order to give effect to the entirety of section 516A.2, we conclude the rule provided
in subsection three applies in the absence of stacking language in the contract. Thus,
when a contract is silent regarding the stacking of uninsured benefits, the insured is
entitled to recover up to the highest policy limit, with no stacking of coverage.

Id. Although the Court specifically addressed uninsured motorist benefits in Mortensen, the
same analysis and interpretation is owed to cases involving underinsured motorist benefits. See
Iowa Code 516A.2(1); see also Greenfield, 737 N.W.2d at 118.
Furthermore, Plaintiffs cannot argue that stacking is permissible on the basis that they did
not personally purchase such coverage under the Farner-Bocken policy issued by Sentry. As set
forth above, Section 516A.2(3) is drafted in such a manner to include policies which benefit an
injured insured. See Iowa Code 516A.2(3) (stating it is the intent of the general assembly
that when more than one motor vehicle insurance policy is purchased by or on behalf of an
injured insured. . .) (emphasis added). See also Mewes v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co., Inc.,
530 N.W.2d 718, 725 (Iowa 1995). There is little doubt that the Farner-Bocken policy was
purchased on behalf of individuals like Plaintiffs. See Exhibit B. Additionally, Sentry has made
no attempt to date to argue that Plaintiffs are not a proper insured under the Farner-Bocken
policy.
As stacking is not permissible under the undisputed facts and law of this case, the Court
is left to decide what, if any, obligation Progressive owes to Plaintiffs pursuant to the Other
Insurance provision of the policy. Progressive is clear in its policy language that any insurance
7
provided with respect to a vehicle that is not a covered auto will be excess over any other uninsured
or underinsured motorist coverage. Exhibit A, p. 13. (Emphasis added). There is no dispute
that Plaintiff was a passenger in a motor vehicle covered under the Sentry Policy. See Exhibit
B; see also Exhibit C, No. 29. As such, Sentry is responsible for primary underinsured motorist
coverage. See Rodish v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 501 N.W.2d 514, 515 (Iowa 1993). Given
the unavailability of stacking, and Progressives position as an excess insurer, Progressives
policy would only apply in this matter if it carried a higher coverage limit than Sentry. It does
not; and therefore, cannot be held liable to Plaintiffs for any amount of legal damages awarded
for underinsured motorist benefits. See Exhibit A, see also Exhibit B; see also Mewes, 530
N.W.2d at 725.
III. CONCLUSION
There is no genuine issue of material fact that Plaintiffs are prohibited from stacking
coverage against Defendants Progressive and Sentry for recovery of underinsured motorist
benefits, if any, in this matter. Furthermore, as Plaintiff was riding as a passenger in a motor
vehicle at the time of incident collision that was not covered by Progressive, the same is an
excess insurer only. The available limits under the Sentry policy exceed that of Progressives
available limits; and therefore, Plaintiffs cannot recover against Progressive for damages of any
kind.

of law;
8

(C) That Plaintiffs claims Progressive Northern Insurance Company are dismissed
with prejudice; and



Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY

Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

Timothy A. Clausen
CASUALTY COMPANY

9

PROOF OF SERVICE

filed this document with the Clerk of Court using the



an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.


Defendants.

LACV NO. 019416

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT

through its attorneys, Peddicord, Wharton, Spencer, Hook, Barron & Wegman, L.L.P., and for its
Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment, hereby
states as follows:
Pursuant to Iowa Rule of Civil Procedure 1.981(8), Progressive Northern Insurance
Company (Progressive) respectfully sets forth the following Statement of Undisputed Material
Facts as to which there is no genuine issue to be tried:
1. Plaintiffs claim for underinsured motorist benefits against Defendant Progressive
are barred pursuant to the antistacking provision of Iowa Code Section 516A.2(3) and
Progressives position as an excess insurer.
2. Plaintiff Terry Campbell was an employee of Farner-Bocken Company on the
date of loss. Exhibit C, Terry Campbells Answers to Interrogatories Propounded by
Progressive, No. 5.
2
3. In the course and scope of his duties as an employee of Farner-Bocken, Terry
Campbell was riding as a passenger in a 2008 Mack semi tractor-trailer at the time of the March
11, 2011, accident with Defendant Rambang. Id. at No. 29; see also Plaintiffs Petition, 8.
4. The vehicle in which Plaintiff was riding as a passenger was owned by Farner-
Bocken Company and insured by Sentry Casualty Company. See Exhibit B, Commercial Auto
Policy issued by Sentry Casualty Company to Farner-Bocken Company with dates of
coverage between November 6, 2010 November 6, 2011.
5. Progressive provided coverage to Plaintiffs relative to a 2007 Ford Taurus with
dates of coverage extending November 1, 2010 May 1, 2011. See Exhibit A, Progressive
Northern Insurance Company Declarations Page and Policy documents issued to Terry
Campbell and Roxann Campbell.
6. The applicable policy limits under Plaintiffs underinsured motorist coverage with
Progressive is limited to $500,00 combined single limit each accident. See Id. (Emphasis
added).
7. Contained within Part III of policy form 9610 IA (03/00) is Progressives insuring
agreement relative to claims made for Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Coverage. See
Exhibit B, pp. 9-13. On page 13, Progressive addresses claims which are made by an insured
where additional or alternative underinsured motorist coverage is available under a separate
policy, to wit:
OTHER INSURANCE
If there is other applicable uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, the amount of
damages which an insured person is entitled to recover shall not exceed the highest limit
for uninsured motorist coverage or underinsured motorist coverage provided under any
one of the applicable policies. We will pay only our share of the damages. Our share is
the proportion that our Limit of Liability bears to the total of all available coverage
limits. However, any insurance we provide with respect to a vehicle that is not a covered
auto will be excess over any other uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage.
3

Id. at p. 13. (Emphasis added.)

8. There is no dispute in this case that Plaintiff was not operating a covered
vehicle at the time the incident motor vehicle accident as Progressive did not insure the 2008
Mack semi tractor-trailer in which Plaintiff was riding as a passenger.
9. Progressive is an excess carrier to the insurer (Sentry) who carried underinsured
motorist coverage on the Mack semi tractor-trailer in which Plaintiff was a passenger at the time
of loss. Id.
10. In further support of its Motion, Progressive relies on Defendant Sentry Casualty
Companys insurance agreement and automobile policy declarations issued to Farner-Bocken
Company, which establishes an available coverage limit for underinsured motorist benefits at
$1,000,000 on the date of loss. See Exhibit B. (Emphasis added.)
11. Given Progressives position as an excess carrier; and further provided that
Progressives available underinsured motorist coverage limit is less than the underinsured
motorist limit available under the primary Sentry policy, Iowa Code 516A.2(3) prohibits
Plaintiffs from asserting a claim for underinsured motorist benefits against Defendant
Progressive.

of law;

(C) That Plaintiffs claims against Progressive Northern Insurance Company are
dismissed with prejudice; and

4


Telephone (515) 243-2100
Facsimile (515) 243-2132
COMPANY
Original E-Filed
Copy to:
T.J. Pattermann
Laura L. Pattermann

Patrick Sealey
PO Box 3086
RAMBANG AND LIECH

Timothy A. Clausen
CASUALTY COMPANY

PROOF OF SERVICE


Signature: __/s/ Randy J. Wilharber_____________

E-FILED 2013 NOV 18 12:05 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
E-FILED 2013 NOV 19 9:59 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
Notice ID: 2RCV31

ROXANN CAMPBELL
,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JACOB TUT LIECH
,
Defendant.


The Defendant has filed a Motion to Compel. A hearing will now be scheduled.

1. A Hearing is scheduled on 12/02/2013 at 02:00 PM at the Sac Co. Courthouse,
2. If counsel desire, they may participate in this hearing via telephone conference
call, which call is to be initiated and paid for by the Defendant. For that purpose, the
Court may be reached at 712-662-7419.

1 of 2
So Ordered
2 of 2

TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, )
ROXANN CAMPBELL, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) No LAC!"#$%#&
)
!s ) ORDER
)
SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY )
'ACOB TUTLIECH, RECHOL )
NYANTHAM RAMBAN(, )
)
D)f)n*ants )

Motion to Compel came on for hearing on December 2, 2013. The
parties appeared by their counsel of record.
Interrogatory o. 1! directed to Terry "llen Campbell sought the
follo#ing information$ %&lease state each particular item of damage 'i.e. past and
future pain and suffering, loss of income, loss of future earning capacity, past and
future medical e(penses, loss of consortium, etc.) being claimed by &laintiff
herein, the amount claimed for each item listed and ho# each item #as
calculated.* Terry Campbell responded by listing +arious items of damage but
did not list the amount claimed for any item of damage. Interrogatory o. 1,
directed to -o(ann Campbell sought the follo#ing information$ %Designate the
dollar amount you are claiming in this case for loss of spousal consortium,
companionship and en.oyment of life and describe ho# such amount's) #as
computed.* o amounts #ere pro+ided. /oth plaintiffs ob.ected to the
interrogatories as calling for attorney #or0 product regarding the computation of
the amount claimed and both plaintiffs indicated that they #ould accept policy
limits in settlement, sub.ect to the appro+al of any applicable underinsured
carriers.
&laintiffs contend that defendants ha+e been pro+ided #ith all the
information to #hich they are entitled. This court disagrees. Io#a -ule of Ci+il
&rocedure 1.,01'2) pro+ides that %interrogatories may relate to any matters
#hich can be in2uired into under -ule 1.,03, including a statement of the specific
E-FILED 2013 DEC 05 2:29 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
dollar amount of money damages claimed and the amounts claimed for separate
items of damage. . . .* "lso, in Gordon v. Noel, 3,! .3.2d ,,1, ,!4 'Io#a
1154) the Io#a 6upreme Court stated$
" party defending a claim is clearly entitled upon appropriate
pretrial re2uest to be informed of the amount of the claim. . .
7T8his includes disco+ery of amounts claimed for separate
elements of damages. . . . It is no ans#er to say that
damages for pain and suffering cannot be pro+ed #ith
mathematical certainty. The person #ho ma0es the claim
can be re2uired to say #hat the claim is.

In this court9s +ie#, defendants are entitled to ha+e plaintiffs set
forth any items of damage they are claiming and #ith respect to each such item
the dollar amount they are claiming for that item. Mo+ant did not ta0e issue #ith
the plaintiffs9 ob.ection that the method of calculation #as attorney #or0 product.
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion is sustained in part.
Terry Campbell, in response to Interrogatory 1!, shall set forth all items of
damage he is claiming and #ith respect to each such item, the dollar amount he
is claiming for that item. -o(ann Campbell, in response to Interrogatory 1,, shall
set forth the dollar amount she claims, if any, for the loss of spousal consortium,
companionship and en.oyment of life.
Dated this 10th day of 6eptember, 2012.

Cler0 to pro+ide copies to$
Counsel of record
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered


ROXANN CAMPBELL

Plaintiff

VS

JACOB TUT LIECH

Defendant

02811 LACV019416

ORDER

Defendant Progressive Northern Insurance Company's Motion for Summary Judgment came on for
hearing on November 18, 2013. The parties appeared by their attorney's of record. Subsequent to the
hearing, plaintiffs filed Partial Dismissal Without Prejudice. In view of the Partial Dismissal it appears
to this Court that the Motion for Summary Judgment is moot.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant Progressive Northern Insurance Company's Motion
for Summary Judgment is moot and no further order will be entered with respect to the Motion.

1 of 2
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered
2 of 2

KLASS LAW FIRM,
L.L.P. 1
ROXANN CAMPBELL,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

J ACOB TUT LIECH, PROGRESSIVE
AND SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY,

Defendants.

NO. LACV019416

DEFENDANT SENTRY CASUALTY
COMPANYS JOINDER IN
DEFENDANTS RECHOL
NYANTHAM RAMBANG AND
JACOB TUT LEICHS DESIGNATION
OF EXPERTS

COMES NOW the Defendant, Sentry Casualty Company, by and through its attorney,
and hereby joins with the Defendants, Rechnol Nyantham Rambang and J acob Tut Liech, in
their Designation of Experts.

Timothy A. Clausen #AT0001554
KLASS LAW FIRM, L.L.P.
Mayfair Center, Upper Level
clausen@klasslaw.com
WWW.KLASSLAW.COM
712/252-1866
712/252-5822 fax

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT SENTRY
CASUALTY COMPANY
Copy to:

T.J . Pattermann
P.O Box 1588

KLASS LAW FIRM,
L.L.P. 2

Patrick Sealey
1128 Historic 4th Street
P.O. Box 3086

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing
instrument was served upon all parties to the
above cause to each of the attorneys of record
herein at their respective addresses disclosed
on the pleading on ____12/30_______________, 2013
By: _____ U.S. Mail ______ facsimile
_____ Hand delivered ______ Overnight courier
_____ Other ________ ___x___ EFC

Signature ___/s/ Mindy Eckmann___________________

E-FILED 2014 FEB 14 4:12 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
E-FILED 2014 FEB 14 4:12 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

KLASS LAW FIRM,
L.L.P.
1
TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL AND ROXANN
CAMPBELL,

Plaintiffs,
vs.

RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBANG, J ACOB
TUT LIECH, PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN
INSURANCE COMPANY AND SENTRY
CASUALTY COMPANY,

Defendants.

NO. LACV019416

DEFENDANT SENTRY
INSURANCE'S MOTION TO SEVER
AND REQUEST FOR TELEPHONIC
HEARING

COMES NOW Defendant SENTRY Casualty Company, and states that a Petition
was filed in this case on March 21, 2013, stating a claim for underinsured motorist coverage
against SENTRY Casualty Company. Pursuant to the Iowa Supreme Court's holding in
Handley v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Company, 467 N.W.2d 247 (Iowa 1991),
Defendant SENTRY Casualty Company moves to sever the claims made by the Plaintiffs
Terry Allen Campbell and Roxann Campbell, against SENTRY Casualty Company for trial
only. Discovery has and should proceed jointly. Further, Defendant SENTRY Casualty
Company states that until the damages are ascertained in Terry Allen Campbell and Roxann
Campbell v. Rechol Nyantham Rambang, Jacob Tut Liech, Progressive Northern Insurance
Company, the underinsured motorist coverage claims of Terry Allen Campbell and Roxann
Campbell, are unknown and cannot be tried.
WHEREFORE, Defendant SENTRY Casualty Company prays the Court enter an
Order severing the claims made by Plaintiffs against SENTRY Casualty Company for trial
only. Discovery should proceed jointly. Further, Defendant prays that the case of Terry
Allen Campbell and Roxann Campbell, v. Rechol Nyantham Rambang, Jacob Tut Liech,
Progressive Northern Insurance Company proceed to trial prior to Terry Allen Campbell and
Roxann Campbell, v. SENTRY Casualty Company. The Defendant further prays that if this

KLASS LAW FIRM,
L.L.P.
2
matter is set for hearing, that the hearing be conducted telephonically pursuant to Iowa Rule
of Civil Procedure 1.431(9).


Timothy A. Clausen #AT0001554
KLASS LAW FIRM, L.L.P.
Mayfair Center, Upper Level
clausen@klasslaw.com
WWW.KLASSLAW.COM
712/252-1866
712/252-5822 fax

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS SENTRY
CASUALTY COMPANY

Copy to:

T.J . Pattermann
P.O Box 1588

Patrick Sealey
1128 Historic 4th Street
P.O. Box 3086

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that the foregoing
instrument was served upon all parties to the
above cause to each of the attorneys of record
herein at their respective addresses disclosed
on the pleading on __March 31_________, 2014
By: _____ U.S. Mail ______ facsimile
_____ Hand delivered ______ Overnight courier
_____ Other _________ __X____ ECF

Signature ___________________________________

Notice ID: 2RCV31

ROXANN CAMPBELL
,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JACOB TUT LIECH
,
Defendant.


The Defendant Sentry Insurance has filed a Motion to Sever and Reqeust for
Telephonic Hearing. A hearing will now be scheduled.

1. A Hearing is scheduled on 05/05/2014 at 9:00 AM at the Sac Co. Courthouse, 100
NW State St., Sac City, Iowa.
2. If counsel desire, they may participate in this hearing via telephone conference
call, which call is to be initiated and paid for by the Defendant Sentry Insurance. For
that purpose, the Court may be reached at 712-662-7419.

1 of 3
2 of 3
So Ordered
3 of 3
1


TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, an )
Individual; and ROXANN CAMPBELL, )
an Individual, )
)
Plaini!!", )
) Ca"# N$% LAC&'()*(+
v"% )
) ORDER ,RANTIN, DEFENDANTS-
RECHOL NYANTHAM RAMBAN,, ) MOTION TO SE&ER
.ACOB TUT LIECH, PRO,RESSI&E )
NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY )
AND SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY, )
)
D#!#ndan"% )

Defendant Sentry Casualty Company moved to sever the claims made by the plaintiffs
against Sentry Casualty Company for trial only. Defendant Sentry Casualty Company is the
underinsured motorist coverage provider. The movant argues that until the damages are
ascertained in Terry Allen Campbell and Roxann Campbell v. Rechol Nyantham Rambang
!acob Tut "iech and #rogressive Northern $nsurance Company the cause of action against Sentry
Casualty Company cannot be tried.
The plaintiffs do not resist the %otion to Sever.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED/
1. The claims made by the plaintiffs against Sentry Casualty Company are severed
for trial.
&. Discovery in this matter shall proceed 'ointly.
(. The case of Terry Allen Campbell and Roxann Campbell v. Rechol Nyantham
Rambang !acob Tut "iech and #rogressive Northern $nsurance Company shall proceed to trial as
E-FILED 2014 APR 15 11:23 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT
&

scheduled. The Court Administrator shall schedule a later trial for the claims involving
Defendant Sentry Casualty Company.
). The hearing scheduled on %ay * &+1) at ,-++ a.m. is cancelled.
Cl#01 $ P0$vid# C$2i#" $-
Counsel of Record
Court Administration
Type: OTHER ORDER
So Ordered


TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, an ) LAW NO.: LACV 01941
In!"#"!$a%& an! RO'ANN CAMPBELL, )
an In!"#"!$a%, )
)
P%a"n("))*, )
)
#*. ) ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL
)
+ACOB TUT LIECH an! SENTRY )
CASUALTY COMPANY, )
)
D,),n!an(*. )

THIS MATTER -a., /n (/ 0, 1,a2! $3/n (1, M/("/n (/ C/n("n$, T2"a% /) P%a"n("))*
T,224 A%%,n Ca.30,%%, an In!"#"!$a%& an! R/5ann Ca.30,%%, an In!"#"!$a% 61,2,"na)(,2
7P%a"n("))*8), a((/2n,49/)92,-/2! T. +. Pa((,2.ann. T2"a% "* -$22,n(%4 *-1,!$%,! (/ 0,:"n /n
W,!n,*!a4, Ma4 ;<, ;014, a( 9:00 a... T1, C/$2( 0,"n: )$%%4 a!#"*,! "n (1, 32,."*,* )"n!* (1a(
://! -a$*, ,5"*(* (/ :2an( P%a"n("))*= M/("/n (/ C/n("n$, T2"a%. A n,> (2"a% !a(, *1/$%! 0,
*-1,!$%,! 04 T2"a% S-1,!$%"n: C/n),2,n-, (12/$:1 (1, C/$2( A!."n"*(2a(/2.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED (1a( P%a"n("))*= M/("/n (/ C/n("n$, T2"a% "* :2an(,!,
(1a( (1"* -a*, "* n/( (/ 0, !"*."**,! a* 3,2 R$%, 1.944 a* (1, C/$2( A!."n"*(2a(/2 "* (/ *,( a T2"a%
S-1,!$%"n: C/n),2,n-, a* *//n a* 32a-("-a%.

BY THE DISTRICT COURT +UD?E

P2,3a2,! an! S$0."((,! 04:

T. +. Pa((,2.ann 9 @AT0000;A
LAW OFFICES OF ?ALLNER B PATTERMANN, P.C.
S$"(, 14C
D00 W,*( B2/a!>a4
C/$n-"% B%$))*, I/>a C1C0D
T,%,31/n,: 6A1;) D;D90999
Fa5: 6A1;) D;D90<14
E9Ma"%: (E3a((,2.annF*:a%%n,2%a>.-/.

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, AN INDIVIDUAL& AND
RO'ANN CAMPBELL, AN INDIVIDUAL

C/3",* (/:

T. +. Pa((,2.ann
LAW OFFICES OF ?ALLNER B PATTERMANN, P.C.
S$"(, 14C
D00 W,*( B2/a!>a4
C/$n-"% B%$))*, I/>a C1C0D

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS TERRY ALLEN CAMPBELL, AN INDIVIDUAL& AND
RO'ANN CAMPBELL, AN INDIVIDUAL

Pa(2"-G L. S,a%,4
HEIDMAN LAW FIRM
11;< H"*(/2"- F/$2(1 S(2,,(
P. O. B/5 D0<
S"/$5 C"(4, I/>a C110;

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT +ACOB TUT LIECH

T"./(14 A. C%a$*,n
HLASS LAW FIRM, L.L.P.
Ma4)a"2 C,n(,2, U33,2 L,#,%
S$"(, ;90
4;<0 S,2:,an( R/a!
S"/$5 C"(4, I/>a C110

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT SENTRY CASUALTY COMPANY
Type: ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE
So Ordered
Notice Id: 2CA004

ROXANN CAMPBELL
,


vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH
,


Notice of Trial Setting Conference


A scheduling conference will be held on 04/28/14 at 10:30 AM with Kellie Orres, as District Court
Designee, pursuant to I.R.C.P 1.602.

This conference shall be conducted by telephone conference call initiated by plaintiff's counsel.
Kellie Orres may be contacted via telephone at: (515) 574-3752.

1. PARTICIPATION: All attorneys appearing in the case shall participate in this conference. A party
who is not represented by counsel shall contact the Court Administrator's office (at the above phone
number) prior to the date and time of the conference call.

2. TRIAL SCHEDULING: A firm trial date shall be established in accordance with the Supreme
Court's time standards as provided by Chapter 23, Iowa Court Rules. NO CONTINUANCES SHALL
BE GRANTED EXCEPT BY COURT ORDER, UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN.

3. SANCTIONS: If a party or attorney fails to participate in the scheduling conference or is
substantially unprepared to participate in the conference, the Court may impose appropriate
sanctions, including reasonable expenses and attorney fees. (I.R.C.P 1.602(5)).

/s/ Kellie Orres
---------------------------------------

Clerk to provide copies or
notice of document to attorneys
of record and parties appearing
pro se.

Notice Id: 2CA101


ROXANN CAMPBELL
,


vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH
,



Trial Notice

The above entitled matter is hereby scheduled for jury trial on 10/21/14 at 09:00 AM .

3 Days Pi/ This trial date is for Deft. Liech
Discovery Due 60 days prior to trial

/s/ Kellie Orres
-----------------------------------

Clerk to provide copies or notice
of this document to attorneys of record,
parties appearing pro se and
judge if assigned

Docket Code = OSTR
Notice Id: 2CA101


ROXANN CAMPBELL
,


vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH
,



Trial Notice

The above entitled matter is hereby scheduled for jury trial on 12/09/14 at 09:00 AM .

3 Days Pi/ Trial for Deft. Sentry
Discovery Due 60 days prior to trial

/s/ Kellie Orres
-----------------------------------

Clerk to provide copies or notice
of this document to attorneys of record,
parties appearing pro se and
judge if assigned

Docket Code = OSTR
IN THE IOWA DISTRICT COURT FOR SAC COUNTY IOWA

ROXANN CAMPBELL

Plaintiff

vs

JACOB TUT LIECH

Defendant


1.944 Dismissal Notice

Petition Filed: 03/21/13
Dismissal Date: 01/01/2015
Date of Notice: 08/12/2014

Pursuant to the provisions of Rule of Civil Procedure 1.944, this case shall be tried or shall be subject to dismissal on the
above date unless an order is entered as provided by said rule. *

*Rule 1.944 does not apply to cases (a) pending on appeal from a court of record to a higher court or under order of
submissions to the court, (b) in which proceedings subsequent to judgment or decree are pending, (c) which have been
stayed pursuant to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, (d) where a party is paying a claim pursuant to written stipulation
on file or court order, and (e) awaiting the action of a referee, master, or other court-appointed officer, provided, however,
that a finding as to (a) through (e) is made and entered of record.

Post December 31 trial or trial-setting conference dates will not serve to avoid dismissal.

Copy of this notice mailed or delivered as provided in R.C.P. 1.422.

/s/ DONNA GEERY
Clerk of Court/Designee
SAC County

E-FILED 2014 AUG 12 8:36 AM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

ROXANNE CAMPBELL,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

JACOB TUT LIECH and PROGRESSIVE

Defendants.

CASE NO. LACV019416

RELEASE OF WORKERS
COMPENSATION LIEN PURSUANT TO
IOWA CODE 85.22

COME NOW Plaintiffs employer, Farner-Bocken Company, and their Insurance
Carrier, Sentry Insurance, and hereby dismiss their previously filed Notice of Lien pursuant to
Iowa Code Chapter 85.22 as having been fully satisfied.
PEDDICORD, WHARTON, SPENCER,
HOOK, BARRON & WEGMAN, L.L.P.
/s/
Mark A. Bosscher, AT0000998
Phone/Fax: 515-243-2100 / 515-243-1925
E-mail: Mark.Bosscher@Peddicord-Law.com
ATTORNEY FOR EMPLOYER
AND INSURANCE CARRIER

Original filed.
Copy to:
Laura L. Pattermann
lpattermann@sgallnerlaw.com
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS

Patrick L. Sealey
Heidman Law Firm
PO Box 3086
PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing instrument was served
upon all parties to the above cause to each of the attorneys of record
herein at their respective addresses disclosed on the pleadings on
August 20, 2014, via U.S. mail.

Signature: /s/ Mark A. Bosscher


LACV - Terry Campbell Et Al vs. Rambang Et Al - Suit Over Collision Dismissed

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

LACV - Terry Campbell Et Al vs. Rambang Et Al - Suit Over Collision Dismissed

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

E-FILED 2013 MAR 21 2:37 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

E-FILED 2013 MAR 21 2:37 PM SAC - CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT

S-ar putea să vă placă și