Reading, Pa., Jan. 19. U.S. District Judge Joseph Leeson has denied a motion filed by Allstate Insurance Company to sever and stay a bad faith claim, including discovery, in a combined breach of contract and bad faith case, but has ordered that Allstate may properly assert work product privilege protection as to matters genuinely prepared in anticipation of litigation.
In Wagner v. Allstate, Judge Leeson conceded that while there may be a basis for separate trial of the breach of contract and bad faith claims under F.R.C.P. 42 , there was no need to prevent simultaneous discovery in both the breach of contract and bad faith claims.
Judge Leeson also granted in part and denied in part Plaintiff’s motion to compel discovery of Allstate’s claims file, ruling that the Court needed more information to make a complete ruling on the motion. The Court ruled that Allstate did have the right to assert privilege over materials in its claims files which were prepared in anticipation of litigation, while observing the parties disputed the date at which time Allstate’s anticipation of litigation over the underlying UIM claim was bona fide.
Wagner v. Allstate Ins. Co., E.D. Pa. 2016 (Leeson, J.)
A U.S. District Court Judge in Utah has granted partial summary judgment in favor of Travelers Insurance in a bad faith suit involving a Cyber Liability insurance policy. U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart of Utah has dismissed portions of a bad faith suit against Travelers, ruling that it has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured, Federal Recovery, in an underlying data breach lawsuit. The Court found that Travelers’ coverage position was “fairly debatable,” and therefore that the position it took cannot, as a matter of law, be found to have been taken in bad faith.
The Court denied Traveler’s motion to dismiss that portion of the suit against it relating to Traveler’s intake and handling of the claim, however. The insured claims that Travelers breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing in allegedly misleading its insured to delay the filing of the claim until it received formal suit papers. The Court also found there were factual issues relating to whether Travelers diligently investigated, evaluated, and communicated about the claim to its insured, and denied Travelers’ summary judgment motion as to those claims also.
The Takeaway: This decision is a textbook example of a jurisdiction in which having a reasonable position to deny coverage to an insured is not the end of the bad faith analysis. Claims handling (the means), separate and apart from the claims decision (the end), is subject to bad faith scrutiny under this jurisdiction’s bad faith law. Best claims practices, therefore, should facilitate proper claims decisions being made in conjunction with proper claims handling, from initial intake to final coverage decision.
Travelers v. Fed. Recovery Services (D. Utah 2016)