In the case of Rau v.
Allstate Fire & Cas. Ins. Co., No. 3:16-cv-0359 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 6, 2018
Mariani, J.), Judge Robert D. Mariani ruled that a carrier's rejection of a policy limits demand, in and of
itself, is not evidence of bad faith absent other evidence of unreasonable and
intentional under-evaluation of the claims presented.
This matter arose out of an alleged UIM bad faith case. The basic allegations by the Plaintiff were
that the carrier failed to provide a reasonable basis for its evaluation of the
Plaintiff’s claims and that the carrier failed to negotiate in good faith.
In its opinion, the court provided a detailed review of the
discovery completed on the Plaintiff's medical history along with a review of the treatment of the Plaintiff (or lack
thereof) and the medical examinations completed. The court also analyzed the parties’ negotiations (during which the
Plaintiff never wavered from a policy limits demand) and the details of a
high/low arbitration that ultimately resulted in the carrier paying less than
the policy limits but more than its evaluation.
Judge Robert D. Mariani M.D.Pa. |
Based upon the record before the court, summary judgment was
granted in favor of the carrier. Judge Mariani found that the carrier came forward with sufficient evidence to establish
an absence of any genuine issues of material facts as to its conduct in its
dealings with the insured.
More
specifically, the court found that, in evaluating the case, the carrier relied
upon expert reports and the absence of any documentation from the Plaintiff
showing any surgical history for which more damages might be due.
The court noted that, while the carrier’s settlement offers
were lower than the policy limits demand submitted by the Plaintiff and the
eventual arbitration award, this fact, in and of itself, does not support a
finding of bad faith.
To the contrary,
the court noted that a low but reasonable evaluation does not constitute bad
faith. The evaluation by the carrier in
this case was found to be reasonable based upon the carrier’s investigation and
the sum it was willing to pay in setting the high/low arbitration
parameters.
Anyone wishing to review a copy of this decision may click this LINK.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.