Monthly Archive for March, 2016
In Peoplekeys, Inc. v. Westfield Insurance Company, the Superior Court affirmed the trial court’s decision, in which the trial court had concluded: “It is evident that the former employee’s counterclaim against Plaintiffs falls within an exclusion for coverage. Accordingly, Defendant had no duty to defend, and the counts for breach of contract and bad faith, necessarily, must fail.”
Date of Decision: February 25, 2016
Peoplekeys, Inc. v. Westfield Ins. Co., No. 100 WDA, 215, 2016 Pa. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 599 (Pa. Super. Ct. February 25, 2016) (Bender, Shogan, Stabile, JJ.) (Non-Precedential)
In Dibish v. Ameriprise Financial, Inc., the Superior court rejected a blanket rule that there is no fiduciary relationship between a seller and buyer of insurance. Rather, “the existence of a confidential relationship requires a fact-sensitive inquiry, which may not be rigidly disposed of as a matter of law.”
Date of Decision: February 16, 2016
Dibish v. Ameriprise Fin., Inc., No. 70 WDA 2015, 2016 Pa. Super. LEXIS 102, (Pa. Super. Ct. February 16, 2016) (Bender, Musmanno, Shogan, JJ.)
In West Chester University Foundation v. Metlife Insurance Company, the court had to decide a motion to remand after the case has been removed from the Court of Common Pleas of Chester County. The court’s focus was on the potential punitive damages claim in the statutory Bad Faith count, as pushing the potential claim over the $75,000 jurisdictional minimum. It found that under applicable case law, a punitive damage award on a potential $57,000 claim (the number the court had calculated) would put the case over the jurisdictional minimum, and declined the motion to remand. The court observed attorney’s fees were also available for statutory Bad Faith, but did not need to speculate about potential attorney’s fees to make its decision.
Date of Decision: February 8, 2016
West Chester Univ. Found. v. Metlife Ins. Co., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15437 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 8, 2016) (Jones, J.)
Easterday v. Federated Mutual Insurance Company involved a class action claim for a declaratory judgment concerning underinsured motorist, coverage, breach of contract and bad faith. Applying the Third Circuit’s analysis in Reifer on when a district court should entertain a declaratory judgment action, the federal district court remanded the case to state court. It found the heart of the case would be decided in the declaratory judgment action, and the results of the contract and bad faith claims were entirely dependent on that decision.
The court found that the plaintiffs were seeking a declaration that they are entitled to underinsured motorist benefits under the business insurance policy at issue. Thus, “[t]he outcome of the bad faith and breach of contract claims depends on the resolution of the declaratory judgment claims. This action neither presents a federal question nor does it promote a federal interest. The dispute over the scope of coverage of the insurance contract is purely a matter of state law and there are no federal interests at stake. In fact, this action involves novel issues involving purely state law. As this action is inherently one for declaratory judgment, coupled with claims for breach of contract and bad faith, I will exercise my discretion to decline jurisdiction and grant the motion to remand this matter to state court.”
Date of Decision: February 8, 2016
Easterday v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15440 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 8, 2016) (Stengel, J.)