Skip to main content

Stonehenge Engineering Corp. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau

4th CircuitJanuary 13, 2000No. 98-2673, 98-2680Cited 22 times
Mixed ResultEmployers Insurance of Wausau$150,000 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Traxler, Hamilton, Goodwin, Southern, Virginia
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The court affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the plaintiff on breach of contract but vacated and remanded the damages award. The court also affirmed dismissal of the bad faith claims and remanded for recalculation of damages to a lesser amount ($150,000 instead of $190,500).

What This Ruling Means

**Stonehenge Engineering Corp. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau** This case involved a dispute between Stonehenge Engineering Corporation and their workers' compensation insurance company, Employers Insurance of Wausau. Stonehenge claimed that the insurance company broke their contract by failing to provide proper coverage or services as promised in their agreement. The court ruled in favor of Stonehenge Engineering, finding that the insurance company did indeed breach their contract. However, the court reduced the damages award from $190,500 to $150,000, determining that the original amount was too high. The court also rejected claims that the insurance company acted in bad faith, meaning they didn't find evidence of intentional wrongdoing beyond the contract violation. This ruling matters for workers because it shows that companies can successfully challenge their insurance providers when contracts aren't honored. When employers have proper insurance coverage disputes resolved, it helps ensure that workers' compensation benefits and workplace protections remain intact. The case demonstrates that courts will hold insurance companies accountable for meeting their contractual obligations, which ultimately protects the systems that safeguard workers when they're injured or need benefits.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.