When Plaintiffs' mortgagee mistakenly believed that Plaintiff Homeowners had not maintained insurance on their home, the non-party mortgage company obtained "forced placed" dwelling insurance from Defendant Insurance Company to protect its security interest in the house. After the house was completely destroyed by fire, Plaintiff recovered under their own insurance policy and paid off their mortgage. They aslo demanded payment as "additional insureds" on Defendant's forced place policy under Missouri's valued policy statutes, Mo. Rev. Stat. section 379.140-379.145. Defendants raised several affirmative defenses, including the inapplicability of the valued policy statutes to forced placed coverage. On Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judmgment as to that and other affirmative defenses, the Court held that Missouri's valued policy statutes make no exception for forced placed coverage. Because the plain language of the statute contains only one exception for "willful fraud or misrepresentation," the Court held the maxim of expressio unius est exclusio alterius permitted no other exceptions to be read into the statute.

Order on Defendant Lear Corporation's Motion for New trial or in the alternative for Judgement as a Matter of Law. The jury awarded Plaintiff over $800,000 in actual and punitive damages on her age harassment and discrimination claims. The Court found sufficient evidence to uphold liability against the Defendant on the Plaintiff's claims. In addition, based upon the jury's finding of "willfulness," the Court determined that the Plaintiff was entitled to additional liquidated damages under the ADEA. The Court also, however, found that this was an appropriate case for remittitur and ordered that the Plaintiff could choose between accepting a new trial on the issue of punitive and liquidated damages or accepting remittitur of the total judgement in the amount of $293,962.