APRIL 2010 BAD FAITH CASES
COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT BAD FAITH COULD EXIST IN THIS CASE EVEN IF THERE WAS NO COVERAGE OBLIGATION (Middle District)

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The insured argued at one point that the bad faith claim could proceed even if the Court ruled that there was no coverage obligation under the insurance contract.

While citing a few cases for this proposition, this result is only found in exceedingly rare scenarios, and not where the breach of contract claim is dismissed on the basis that the insurer has no duty to provide coverage under the policy.

The court did order the declaratory judgment issue on coverage decided prior to trial, but refused to sever and stay discovery of the bad faith claims.

Date of Decision: March 22, 2010

Amitie One Condo. Ass’n v. Nationwide Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 1:07-CV-1756, United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26867 (M.D.  Pa. Mar. 22, 2010) (Conner, J.).

0 Responses to “APRIL 2010 BAD FAITH CASES
COURT REJECTS ARGUMENT THAT BAD FAITH COULD EXIST IN THIS CASE EVEN IF THERE WAS NO COVERAGE OBLIGATION (Middle District)”


Comments are currently closed.