PROGRESSIVE CORPORATION v. HANBERRY (2025)

EN BANC ORDER

Before the Court en banc is the petition by The Progressive Corporation and Blue Hill Specialty Insurance Company, Inc. (collectively, Progressive), for permission to appeal an interlocutory order. The trial court's order denied Progressive's motion to sever and granted Christopher Payne Hanberry's motion for partial summary judgment. Also before the Court is Hanberry's response.

After review, we grant Progressive's petition to appeal. Based on the sufficiency of the petition, response, and exhibits, we find no further briefing or record presentation is necessary for this Court to make a decision. Miss. R. App. P. 5(e). We thus affirm in part and reverse in part the trial court's interlocutory order.

Specifically, we affirm the denial of Progressive's motion to sever. But we reverse the trial court's grant of partial summary judgment to Hanberry on its declaratory-judgment action against Progressive. Specifically, we find the trial court legally erred by finding there was a second, separate $1,000,000 limit of liability under Progressive's policy with insureds Vencen Simpson and Matthew Kashuan King. We thus render judgment in Progressive's favor on Hanberry's declaratory-judgment claim.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Progressive's petition for permission to appeal an interlocutory order is granted. The decision to deny Progressive's motion to sever is affirmed. But the decision to grant summary judgment in Hanberry's favor in his declaratory-judgment action against Progressive is reversed and rendered.

SO ORDERED, this the 12th day of June, 2025.

JAMES D. MAXWELL II, JUSTICE

AGREE: COLEMAN, P.J., MAXWELL, CHAMBERLIN, ISHEE, SULLIVAN AND BRANNING, JJ. AGREES IN PART: GRIFFIS, J. DISAGREES: KING, P.J. NOT PARTICIPATING: RANDOLPH, C.J.