In
the case of Clarke v. Liberty Mutual
Insurance Company, the court confirmed that a discrepancy between the alleged
damages and the carrier’s evaluation alone does not amount to bad faith.
More specifically, the Plaintiffs alleged
that, since the Plaintiff’s medical bills totaled over $39,000.00 and given
that the Plaintiff may require additional injections in the future, the
Defendant carrier was alleged to have engaged in bad faith in concluding that
the claim fell within the $15,000.00 third party settlement.
The
court followed previous decisions in which it had been held that alleged
“low-ball” offers alone cannot support a claim for bad faith. Rather, a Plaintiff must allege factual
allegations to show why the alleged “low-ball” offer was actually unreasonable
and how the carrier knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that it was
unreasonable.
Finding
that such claims were not made in the Clarke case, the court granted the Motion to Dismiss.
A
similar ruling was entered by Judge Caputo in the Moran v. USAA case where he again found that a discrepancy in the
evaluation of the claim alone does not get around the issue of the Plaintiff
pleading a bad faith claim in a conclusory fashion.
Anyone
wishing to review a copy of the Clarke decisions may click this LINK.
The Moran decision can be viewed HERE.
The Moran decision can be viewed HERE.
I
send thanks to Attorney Brigid Q. Alford of the Camp Hill, Pennsylvania office
of Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman and Goggin for bringing this case to my
attention.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.