Did the district court err in sustaining Le Mars’ motion for summary judgment?
The Court wrote that there appeared to be no dispute of fact that the Steffensmeiers filed suit against the tort-feasor, Graham on September 9, 2004, that the Steffensmeiers’ case against Graham went to trial, that the court in the Steffensmeiers’ case against Graham entered judgment in Mary Steffensmeier’s favor in the amount of $175,000 on February 21, 2006, and that the Steffensmeiers did not give Le Mars notice of the suit against Graham until March 8, when they made demand on Le Mars for underinsured motorist coverage. Instead, the Steffensmeiers argued that there were genuine issues of material fact regarding (1) whether they gave reasonable notice to Le Mars that they had filed suit against Graham and (2) whether Le Mars was prejudiced by any failure to give reasonable notice. The Court said it had to therefore review the pleadings and evidence regarding reasonable notice and prejudice. The policy required the Steffensmeiers to give “reasonable notice of the pendency of the suit
