Dale and Elaine Meller contracted with Ashley Farm Services Farm to spray their soybean crop with an appropriate herbicide. The Meller’s claimed that Ashley Farms sprayed the wrong herbicide on their soybean crop, resulting in the soybean crop’s total loss. Suit followed and Ashley Farms tendered the defense to its insurer, Mesa Underwriters Specialty Insurance Company (MUSIC). MUSIC denied coverage and thereafter the two parties entered a RSMo. §537.065 Settlement Agreement/Covenant Not to Execute.
Ashley Farms informed MUSIC that it had entered the Covenant Not to Execute with the Mellers by providing a courtesy copy of it to MUSIC via email. After learning of the Covenant Not to Execute, MUSIC filed a motion to intervene in the lawsuit arguing that §537.065.4 gave it an unconditional right to intervene and participate in the litigation. §537.065.4 provides:
- Any insurer or insurers who receive notice pursuant to this section shall have the unconditional right to intervene in any pending civil action involving the claim for damages within thirty days after receipt of such notice…
The trial court agreed with MUSIC and granted the motion to intervene. Thereafter, the Mellers and Ashley Farms took a writ to the Western District Court of Appeals, which reversed the trial court, and denied intervention. The Court explained that it must give effect to the legislative intent as reflected in the plain language of the statute and in so doing pointed out “We cannot read any portion of a statute in isolation; instead, we read the entire statute so as to harmonize all of the statute’s provisions.” State ex rel Meller vs Beetem 678 S.W. 3rd478
So, while recognizing §537.065.4 clearly appears to allow intervention, this clause is subject to and limited by §537.065.1 which limits §537.065 and the actions prescribed therein to “Any person having an unliquidated claim[s] for damages against a tort-feasor, on account of personal injuries, bodily injuries, or death…” It should surprise no one that the Court did not believe the injury and death to soybeans is not what the legislature intended and held that §537.065 does not apply to property damage claims.