Jackson v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 14-1755 (8th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CaseJackson claimed to be at work when her house burned. Little Rock Fire Department investigator Baker determined the fire was started by human intervention. Baker detected accelerants in the house; the fire's points of origin were inconsistent with accidental causes. Baker initially believed that Jackson might have been the victim of a hate crime, because he discovered racially derogative graffiti in her garage, but there were no signs of forced entry and the house was largely empty of personal items, food, or furniture. Baker claims that Jackson stated that she was the only person with access to the house and that she was not missing any property. Baker obtained a search warrant for her cell phone records, which indicated that Henson, Jackson's coworker, attempted to call Jackson three times during the period at issue. Henson denied calling Jackson. Baker concluded that Henson may have burned Jackson's home at her request. No criminal charges were filed. Allstate's investigative unit concluded that Henson had burned Jackson's home, noting that Jackson was subject to a divorce decree that ordered her to sell her house and that she tried to sell for several years,. Allstate denied Jackson's insurance claim based on Intentional Acts and Material Misrepresentations Exclusions. A jury found in favor of Allstate. The Eighth Circuit affirmed, rejecting procedural challenges and a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence.
Court Description: Beam, author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Colloton, Circuit Judge] Civil case - Insurance. Plaintiff's claims for unjust enrichment and estoppel were quasi-contractual and precluded under Arkansas law by the existence of the insurance contract in question; the district court did not err in dismissing plaintiff's bad faith claim as there was no evidence that Allstate's denial of her claim was "dishonest, malicious or oppressive;" discovery rulings affirmed; rulings excluding character witnesses and limiting time to present evidence at trial affirmed; late disclosure of an expert's field study was harmless; attempt to admit Google Maps printout regarding drive time was properly rejected as hearsay; no error in denying plaintiff's attempt to introduce evidence that no criminal charges were filed in this arson; the court could not review plaintiff's argument that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict for Allstate on plaintiff's breach of contract claim as she failed to file a Rule 50(b) motion after the entry of judgment; no error in denying plaintiff's motion to require Allstate to pay her mortgage company or in denying her request for a statutory penalty and attorneys' fees under Ark. Code Sec. 23-79-208(a)(1).
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.