AUGSBURGER v. NAVY MUTUAL AID ASSOCIATION (2020)

MEMORANDUM ***

Rebecca Augsburger appeals from an order granting summary judgment to Navy Mutual Aid Association in an action asserting that Navy Mutual wrongfully denied her life insurance claim following her husband's death. We affirm.

We review a grant of summary judgment de novo, construing all evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Devereaux v. Abbey, 263 F.3d 1070, 1074 (9th Cir. 2001) (en banc). We apply Washington law to Augsburger's state-law claims. See Ticknor v. Choice Hotels Int'l, Inc., 265 F.3d 931, 939 (9th Cir. 2001).

Under Washington law, mutual assent to the formation of a contract is judged based on the parties’ outward expressions and acts, not their unexpressed intentions. City of Everett v. Sumstad's Estate, 95 Wash.2d 853, 631 P.2d 366, 367 (1981) (en banc). Here, Navy Mutual communicated clearly and repeatedly to Augsburger that under the terms of the prior family policy, purchasing a new policy that covered only her life would result in termination of existing coverage on her husband's life. Augsburger objectively manifested assent to replace her existing policy with one that covered her life alone. Navy Mutual reasonably and in good faith investigated and then denied Augsburger's claim under the old policy on that basis. See Coventry Assoc. v. Am. States Ins. Co., 136 Wash.2d 269, 961 P.2d 933, 938 (1998) (en banc); Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-330(4).¹ The record does not reflect any mutual mistake that would support reformation, nor could a reasonable jury find that Navy Mutual negligently assisted Augsburger during the application process.

AFFIRMED.

FOOTNOTES

1.   Augsburger's Motion to File Supplemental Excerpts of Record (ECF No. 26) is DENIED. Navy Mutual's Motion to File a Supplemental Brief (ECF No. 34) is DENIED as moot.