From the tragic Station Night Club fire came a decision from the Rhode Island Supreme Court discussing R.I. Gen. Laws § 12-28-5. See Derderian v. Essex Ins. Co., 44 A. 3d 122 (R.I. 2012).
Section 12-28-5 is part of Rhode Island’s Victims Bill of Rights Act. The statute states in part that: Upon his or her final conviction of a felony after a trial by jury, a civil judgment shall automatically be entered by the trial court against the defendant conclusively establishing his or her liability to the victim for any personal injury and/or loss of property that was sustained by the victim as a direct and proximate cause of the felonious conduct of which the defendant has been convicted.
R.I. Gen. Laws § 12-28-5(a).
Section 12-28-5.1 clarifies that “conviction” includes a guilty plea or nolo contendere entry (the claimant accepts a guilty plea but does not admit guilt). But it does not cover felonies related to operation of a motor vehicle. Nor does § 12-28-5 permit recovery for certain types of damages such as punitive damages. See Trainor v. Town of North Kingstown, 625 A. 2d 1349 (R.I. 1993).
Rhode Island car accident lawyers will pursue a separate negligence action to help victims recover for automobile-related personal injuries.
In Derderian, supra, the owners of the Station brought suit against their insurance company, arguing that the subject insurance policy should apply to provide a legal defense of the criminal claims brought against the owners and for any fines imposed due to same. The insurer, of course, disagreed, noting that the policy covered only damages owed because of the defined policy terms including “bodily injury” in “civil proceedings” including where “suit” was brought. Id. The owners countered that grand jury indictments against them constituted a “suit” and that because R.I. Gen. Laws § 12-28-5 includes a provision for damages, that the insurer was so bound to provide coverage and a legal defense. Having lost the fight at the trial level, the owners RI lawyers filed an appeal to the Rhode Island Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court, as in other cases involving insurance policies, looked at the policy terms as the policy is a contract. The Court agreed with the insurer that “suit” as used in the policy was not broad enough to cover the owners’ criminal proceedings. Id. Nor did the Court accept the owners’ argument that the criminal proceedings involved “civil proceedings” as defined by the policy. In affirming the trial court, the Court noted that the parties to this insurance contract intended that the insurer would only provide a defense “for civil proceedings in which bodily injury or property damage was alleged.”
As R.I. Gen. Laws § 12-28-5 may involve Rhode Island personal injury clients, RI personal injury lawyers should review this interesting decision.
