Jones v. J. Kim Hatcher Ins. Agencies, Inc.

Summary

The court held that the complaint did not establish contributory negligence as a matter of law because the reasonableness of Jones's reliance on his insurance agent depended on the parties' prior dealings and the agent's assurances. It also held that the complaint adequately pleaded punitive damages by alleging particular willful or wanton conduct and facts permitting an inference that an authorized corporate agent engaged in that conduct. The court therefore affirmed the ruling on contributory negligence and reversed the ruling dismissing punitive damages.