In denying this Motion to Compel by the Plaintiff, the court essentially ruled that the other, prior bad faith claims were irrelevant to the case at hand. Judge Gibson found that there was no close “connection between other bad faith claims against Defendant and the issue of materiality here, particularly considering the myriad of potential factual differences between other claims and the present claim, including different types of policies, unique policy language, the application of different states’ law, [and] varying circumstances surrounding the bad faith allegations…..”
Judge Gibson additionally noted that “the general rule [is] that courts in the Third Circuit ‘disfavor the discovery of similar claims evidenced in bad faith cases.’”
The court additionally denied this Motion to Compel evidence of ten (10) years of prior bad faith actions as overbroad and unduly burdensome given that there was no geographic limit, no limit to the type of insurance policy at issue, no valid explanation as to why a ten (10) year period was required or why a shorter period would be inadequate.
Anyone wishing to review this decision may click this LINK.
I
send thanks to Attorney Lee Applebaum of the Fineman, Krekstein & Harris law
firm in Philadelphia for bringing this case to my attention. Check out Attorney Applebaum’s excellent
blog entitled Pennsylvania and New Jersey Insurance Bad Faith Case Law
blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.