What Is the Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit?
The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit is a single civil case in which Kyle and Samantha Busch sued Pacific Life Insurance Company, agent Rodney A. Smith, and Red River LLC over indexed universal life policies. It is not a class action or a multidistrict litigation.
An indexed universal life (IUL) policy is permanent life insurance that pairs a death benefit with cash value tied to a stock market index. The Buschs sued individually and as trustees of two irrevocable life insurance trusts that owned some of the policies.
The Buschs filed the complaint in Lincoln County Superior Court, North Carolina, on October 14, 2025. Pacific Life removed it to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina on November 20, 2025.
Searchers call this dispute the Kyle Busch lawsuit, the Pacific Life lawsuit, or Busch v. Pacific Life. All three names point to one proceeding, which the Kyle Busch lawsuit page also covers.
“The Complaint in this action asserts claims that allegedly arise out of 'the design, sale, and administration' of several Pacific Life indexed universal life insurance policies (the 'Policies') sold to Plaintiffs by Rodney Smith.”
Source: Pacific Life Insurance Company, Notice of Removal describing the complaint, Busch v. Pacific Life Insurance Company, No. 5:25-cv-00195 (W.D.N.C. Nov. 20, 2025), Doc. 1, paragraph 11
Why Was the Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit Filed?
The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit was filed because the Buschs alleged that Pacific Life and agent Rodney A. Smith sold them policies as a safe, tax-free retirement plan that needed far more money than promised.
The complaint says Smith approached the couple in 2017 as a retirement planner with direct access to Pacific Life's design and tax teams. It says he assured them the policies would be fully funded after a limited number of premium payments.
Busch told reporters the pitch was $1 million a year for five years, followed by about $800,000 a year in withdrawals from age 52. Doubt began when a sixth premium notice arrived. An independent firm then reviewed the policies and projected a lapse within 16 months, according to the Associated Press.
The Buschs also named Pacific Life itself, not only the agent. The complaint says the insurer acted as an active financial advisor and bears vicarious liability for Smith and Red River LLC.
Busch said the couple went public to warn other buyers who were not wealthy or famous.
What Harms Does the Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit Allege?
The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit alleges four distinct harms, all flowing from the same policy purchases rather than from separate events. The amended complaint pleaded five causes of action: two negligence counts, unfair and deceptive trade practices, breach of fiduciary duty, and negligent misrepresentation.
Pacific Life denied responsibility and no court ruled on any allegation. Each harm below therefore remains an allegation, not a finding.
Premium Loss
Premium loss, in an insurance dispute, is money a policyholder paid in premiums that cannot be recovered through cash value, benefits, or refunds.
The complaint says the Buschs paid $10.4 million in premiums and suffered net out-of-pocket losses of $8,582,007. The complaint states the loss as a net figure.
A premium loss claim like this one depends on proving misrepresentation, not on showing that the policies simply performed poorly.
Undisclosed Commissions and Charges
Undisclosed charges are policy costs, fees, or sales compensation that a buyer was not clearly told about before purchasing.
Busch said Smith collected a 35% up-front commission that the couple learned about only after the fact, as the Associated Press reported. The complaint also alleges that the defendants masked excessive internal charges.
The amended complaint adds a structural theory. It says Smith paired Death Benefit Option B with 100% Basic Coverage at very large face amounts, which inflated the commissionable target premium.
Lost Investment Opportunity
Lost investment opportunity is the growth a person could have earned if the same money had gone into a different financial product.
The complaint says the Buschs missed chances to invest in more suitable and sustainable financial products. Busch said he learned his money was going to the insurer's account rather than the market, so it did not grow as stocks rose.
Insurers generally describe IUL cash value as index-linked with downside protection, not as direct market investing.
Emotional Distress and Financial Instability
Emotional distress, in a civil claim, is mental suffering a plaintiff says resulted from the defendant's conduct, which a court may weigh as damages.
The complaint lists severe financial instability and emotional distress among the damages, alongside the premium losses. Samantha Busch said in a video posted to X that the couple would keep fighting Pacific Life.
Emotional distress damages generally depend on a successful underlying claim, and this case ended before any court addressed them.
What Is the Current Status of the Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit?
The current status of the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit is closed. The parties settled on confidential terms and filed a stipulation of dismissal on March 13, 2026, according to a public docket listing.
A stipulation of dismissal generally ends a case when every party agrees, without a ruling on the merits. This page did not confirm a separate court order of dismissal.
Busch v. Pacific Life Insurance Company
Pacific Life served as the lead defendant in the federal case. The Buschs filed an amended complaint with a jury demand on January 13, 2026, and Pacific Life moved to dismiss it on January 22, 2026.
The parties filed a notice of settlement on February 26, 2026, which paused the pending motions.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina, Statesville Division |
| Federal case number | 5:25-cv-00195 |
| State case number | 25CV002675-540, Lincoln County Superior Court |
| Judges | District Judge Matthew E. Orso and Magistrate Judge David Keesler, per the docket |
| Filed | October 14, 2025, in state court |
| Removed to federal court | November 20, 2025 |
| Plaintiffs' counsel | RP Legal, LLC and James, McElroy & Diehl, P.A. |
| Pacific Life's counsel | Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP and Carlton Fields |
| Outcome | Settled; stipulation of dismissal filed March 13, 2026 |
Removal did not change the claims. Pacific Life relied on diversity jurisdiction. The Buschs are North Carolina citizens, Pacific Life is a citizen of Nebraska and California, and Smith and Red River LLC are citizens of Arizona.
Did Kyle Busch Settle the Pacific Life Lawsuit?
Yes. Kyle and Samantha Busch settled the Pacific Life lawsuit in early 2026, but the terms and any payment amount were never publicly disclosed.
The roughly $8.5 million in headlines describes the alleged loss, not a payout. No source reviewed confirms what, if anything, Pacific Life paid. Pacific Life said both sides worked constructively toward a confidential result.
The notice of settlement said every party would bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. Neither side was ordered to cover the other's legal expenses.
The complaint asked for actual, consequential, punitive, and treble damages under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-16, plus attorneys' fees. Those were requests, and no court awarded any of them.
A settlement without a ruling does not mean Pacific Life admitted fault. It also does not mean the Buschs' claims lacked merit, because no judge or jury decided them.
Latest Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit Updates
The latest Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit updates and news, including new filings, rulings, and case-count reports, are tracked below as they're confirmed. As of November 2026, the Busch v. Pacific Life Insurance Company case reached a settlement, described in the timeline below. Every verified development is listed in the timeline below, in order.
Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit Timeline
Idaho Supreme Court Vacates a Separate Pacific Life IUL Verdict
The Idaho Supreme Court vacated a $1.5 million jury verdict against Pacific Life on September 16, 2026, in Shelstad v. Pacific Life Insurance Company, Docket No. 52014. That Idaho case is legally separate from the Busch lawsuit.
Kyle Busch Dies at 41 After the Lawsuit Had Ended
The Busch family, Richard Childress Racing, and NASCAR announced on May 21, 2026 that Kyle Busch had died at age 41. Statements reviewed gave no cause of death, and the lawsuit had ended more than two months earlier.
Parties File a Stipulation of Dismissal
A stipulation of dismissal appeared on the docket for case 5:25-cv-00195 on March 13, 2026, one of the last filings in Busch v. Pacific Life Insurance Company before the case closed.
Notice of Settlement Filed in Federal Court
The Buschs, Pacific Life, Rodney A. Smith, and Red River LLC told the Western District of North Carolina on February 26, 2026 that they had reached a confidential settlement. The notice disclosed no terms and expected a dismissal filing within 30 days.
Court Orders a Status Update
A text-only order on January 26, 2026 directed the parties in Busch v. Pacific Life to update the court on the status of the case. The settlement notice cited this order.
Pacific Life Moves to Dismiss the Amended Complaint
Pacific Life's lawyers at Carlton Fields and Parker Poe filed a motion to dismiss on January 22, 2026. The motion argued the Buschs signed illustrations and disclosures, failed to keep the policies funded, and sued after the limitations period expired.
Buschs File an Amended Complaint
Kyle and Samantha Busch filed an amended complaint with a jury demand on January 13, 2026. It detailed a portfolio of Pacific Discovery Xelerator policies and pleaded five causes of action against Pacific Life, Smith, and Red River LLC.
Case Reassigned to Judge Matthew E. Orso
The Western District of North Carolina reassigned case 5:25-cv-00195 to District Judge Matthew E. Orso on December 18, 2025, according to a docket listing. The case caption later carried his initials.
Pacific Life Removes the Case to Federal Court
Pacific Life filed a notice of removal on November 20, 2025. It moved the Busch complaint from Lincoln County Superior Court to the Western District of North Carolina, and Smith and Red River LLC consented.
Kyle Busch Discusses the Lawsuit Publicly at Phoenix
Busch described the lawsuit to reporters at Phoenix Raceway on the Saturday before the season finale, according to the Associated Press. He called the retirement-plan promises a lie and said the couple went public to help other policyholders.
Pacific Life Is Served With the Complaint
Pacific Life was served through its registered agent on October 23, 2025. That service date started the 30-day clock for removing the case to federal court.
Buschs File the Complaint in Lincoln County
Kyle and Samantha Busch sued Pacific Life, Rodney A. Smith, and Red River LLC in Lincoln County Superior Court on October 14, 2025, under case number 25CV002675-540.
Pacific Life Adds Two More Policies to the Portfolio
Two Pacific Discovery Xelerator 2 policies joined the portfolio in 2020, according to the amended complaint. Both insured and were owned by Kyle Busch.
Pacific Life Issues the First Two Policies
Pacific Life issued the first two Pacific Discovery Xelerator policies in 2018, according to the amended complaint. One insured each spouse, and an irrevocable trust owned each.
Agent Rodney A. Smith Approaches the Buschs
The complaint alleges Smith approached the Buschs in 2017 as a retirement planner with direct access to Pacific Life's design and tax teams. Pacific Life has not admitted that allegation.
What Did Pacific Life Allegedly Know About the Kyle Busch Policies?
Pacific Life allegedly knew the Kyle Busch policies would lapse without extra funding, according to the amended complaint. It says internal data projected the policies would exhaust their cash value by mid-2024.
The complaint adds that Pacific Life approved large face amounts and a structure that raised commissionable premium. It also quotes the insurer's July 2022 guidance that revised policy terms offered "better performance and added flexibility."
Pacific Life denied responsibility. Its motion to dismiss said the Buschs had a team of their own advisors and attested the policies met their needs.
The motion also argued the illustrations showed tax-free policy loans, not withdrawals. One 2018 illustration projected loans of $710,929 beginning at age 51, on a non-guaranteed basis.
Pacific Life said the Buschs failed to pay planned premiums on time, then surrendered or lapsed the policies. It pointed out they held up to $90 million of coverage on Busch's life while the policies were in force.
On limitations, Pacific Life said negligence claims on the 2018 and 2020 policies expired in 2021 and 2023, three years after delivery.
| Defendant | Role alleged in the complaint | Response |
|---|---|---|
| Pacific Life Insurance Company | Insurer that issued the policies and allegedly acted as an advisor | Moved to dismiss; said it stands behind its IUL products |
| Rodney A. Smith | Arizona-based agent who allegedly designed and sold the policies | Reportedly denied most allegations |
| Red River LLC | Nevada firm whose sole member is Smith | Reportedly denied most allegations with Smith |
When the suit was filed, Pacific Life said it does not comment on individual matters and that its life insurance products each have different characteristics. It added that it stands by its IUL products.
How Does the Kyle Busch Pacific Life Lawsuit Compare to the Shelstad Pacific Life Case?
The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit differs from the Shelstad Pacific Life case in who sued, what failed, and how each ended. Both involve Pacific Life IUL policies, but they are separate proceedings.
In Shelstad, an Idaho retiree sold an apartment complex and invested in Future Income Payments, a product later exposed as a Ponzi scheme. Its payments were meant to fund her policy premiums. A jury awarded $1,526,136.54 in May 2024, splitting fault 60% to Pacific Life and 40% to her agent.
The Idaho Supreme Court vacated the judgments against Pacific Life on September 16, 2026. It held that Idaho's economic loss rule imposed no duty to protect against purely economic loss. It also found the evidence insufficient to show the agent acted for Pacific Life.
| Case | Plaintiffs | Core allegation | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Busch v. Pacific Life (this page) | Kyle and Samantha Busch | IUL policies misrepresented as a safe, tax-free retirement plan | Confidential settlement, dismissal filed March 13, 2026 |
| Shelstad v. Pacific Life (Idaho, separate) | Karen Shelstad and other plaintiffs | Negligence tied to a policy funded by a Ponzi-scheme investment | Verdict vacated by the Idaho Supreme Court, September 16, 2026 |
No source reviewed reports a class action or consolidated proceeding tied to the Busch case. Busch's attorney said other policyholders had reported similar losses.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit about?
The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit is a civil case in which Kyle and Samantha Busch alleged that Pacific Life and agent Rodney A. Smith sold them indexed universal life policies as a safe retirement plan. They alleged misleading illustrations and undisclosed costs.
Is the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit a class action?
No. The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit was a single civil case brought by two plaintiffs, not a class action or multidistrict litigation. The Buschs sued individually and as trustees of two irrevocable life insurance trusts.
Who were the defendants in the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit?
The defendants in the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit were Pacific Life Insurance Company, agent Rodney A. Smith, and Smith's firm, Red River LLC. Pacific Life led the defense and moved the case to federal court.
Did Kyle Busch win the Pacific Life lawsuit?
No court decided the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit, so neither side won at trial. The parties settled on confidential terms and filed a stipulation of dismissal on March 13, 2026.
How much did Pacific Life pay Kyle Busch?
The settlement terms in the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit were never made public, so no payment amount is confirmed. The $8,582,007 figure is the net loss the Buschs alleged, not a payout.
Is the Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit related to the Idaho Pacific Life verdict?
No. The Kyle Busch Pacific Life lawsuit is not legally connected to the Idaho case, Shelstad v. Pacific Life. Both involve Pacific Life indexed universal life policies, but they have different plaintiffs, courts, and facts.