Jaroslaw Waskowski v. State Farm Mutual Automobile


Per Curiam OPINION filed : AFFIRMED, decision not for publication. Alan E. Norris, Circuit Judge; Eric L. Clay, Circuit Judge and Raymond M. Kethledge, Circuit Judge.

Download PDF
Case: 13-1706 Document: 49-2 Filed: 06/26/2014 Page: 1 NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0461n.06 FILED No. 13-1706 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT JAROSLAW WASKOWSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Jun 26, 2014 DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN MEMORANDUM OPINION BEFORE: NORRIS, CLAY, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Plaintiff Jaroslaw Waskowski was involved in a car accident, and sued State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company in Michigan state court after State Farm terminated his benefits. State Farm removed the action to federal court where, after a five-day trial, the jury returned a verdict that Waskowski was in fact injured in the car accident, but that State Farm owed no additional benefits beyond the amount it had already paid. Waskowski appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to amend the judgment to add damages or, in the alternative, his motion for a new trial on damages. The panel has had the opportunity to consider the arguments advanced by the parties and to conduct our own independent review of the record on appeal. In this case, the district court issued an Opinion and Order which explains in detail the analysis behind the court’s denial of plaintiff’s motions. Waskowski v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 11-CV-13036, 2013 WL Case: 13-1706 Document: 49-2 Filed: 06/26/2014 Page: 2 Waskowski v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. No. 13-1706 1774696 (E.D. Mich. Apr. 25, 2013) (Page ID 1636). We agree with the reasoning of the district court and affirm on that basis. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?