Mark Samuels, Individually and on Behalf of His Minor Children, Geoffrey Samuels, Eric Samuels and Naomi Samuels and Madilyn Samuels v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, State Farm Fire & Casualty Insurance Company, Evanston Insurance Company and Alvin Samuels

Summary

The Supreme Court of Louisiana held that an insurance policy may be reformed to correct a clerical error on its declarations page when the evidence establishes the parties' mutual intent. The court concluded that Evanston's umbrella policy was intended to provide coverage excess to State Farm's umbrella policy and affirmed the court of appeal's judgment.

Holdings

1. An insurance contract may be reformed to reflect the parties' mutual intent when an insurer's clerical error causes the written policy to misidentify an underlying policy, including when the policy is not ambiguous.
2. The State Farm and Evanston policies did not require pro rata sharing because, after reformation, they provided different layers of coverage, with Evanston's policy excess over the State Farm umbrella policy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an insurance policy may be reformed when a clerical error on the declarations page misidentifies an underlying policy but the evidence establishes the parties' mutual intent.
2. Whether the mistaken identification of the underlying policy required the State Farm and Evanston umbrella policies to share liability pro rata under mutually repugnant other-insurance clauses.

Disposition

affirmed