In the case of Meyers
v. Protective Ins. Co., No. 3:16-cv-01821 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 10, 2017 Caputo,
J.), the court denied a second Motion to Dismiss filed against a bad faith
claim alleging issues with the investigation and claim evaluation by the
Defendant carrier.
It is noted that this UIM bad faith was previously dismissed
for failure to state a plausible claim.
After the Plaintiff was given leave to amend the Complaint, the carrier
again filed a Motion to Dismiss in this uninsured motorist claim matter. As noted, the court denied the second Motion
to Dismiss.
The court found that the Amended Complaint set forth factual
support to allegations that the carrier refused to promptly communicate with
Plaintiff, repeatedly misrepresented matters to the Plaintiff, and allegedly
failed to comply with various insurance regulations.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click
this LINK.
I send thanks to Attorney Lee Applebaum, the writer of the
excellent Pennsylvania and New Jersey Insurance Bad Faith Case Law Blog for
bringing this case to my attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.