Tort Talk

Subscribe
Visit Blog
By: Foley, Comerford & Cummins

Latest from Tort Talk - Page 2

In the case of Baldridge v. GEICO, No. 18-CV-1407 (W.D. Pa. Dec. 3, 2018 Schwab, J.), the court denied a Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff’s Complaint in a bad faith claim. The court found that the Plaintiff adequately pled a statutory bad faith claim in this UIM case based upon allegations of improper claims handling.   According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff alleged serious injuries, extensive treatment, and over a million dollars in lost wages…
As reported in the Pennsylvania and New Jersey Insurance Bad Faith Case Law blog by Attorney Lee Applebaum, there were three (3) recent Federal Middle District Court of Pennsylvania Opinions handed down in December, 2018 in which the court found that the Plaintiff’s bad faith pleadings constituted conclusory allegations that had to be dismissed under the standard of review pertinent to validity of federal Complaints.  However, the Plaintiffs in all of these cases were permitted…
I am republishing the below post at the request of Lackawanna Pro Bono.  I plan to attend the meeting as well unless I get jammed up by a doctor’s deposition currently scheduled for the same time.   Have no fear–this is just an informational meeting.  No commitments will be imposed.  Hope to see you there.  Thanks. Please Join Members of the Judiciary, Current Volunteers & Lackawanna Pro Bono Staff Pro Bono Volunteer Informational Session Thursday, January…
In the Lycoming County Court of Common Pleas decision in the case of Lutz v. Williamsport Hospital, No. 18-CV-0384 (C.P. Lycoming Co. July 5, 2018 Linhardt, J.), the court reaffirmed the well-settled principle that a Plaintiff was not required to specifically name every potential actor involved in the Plaintiff’s care at a defendant hospital when pleading vicarious liability claims against the hospital.   As such, the court overruled the Defendant’s Preliminary Objections to the Plaintiff’s vicarious…
stethoscope.jpg
In the case of Kellock v. Wilkes-Barre Hospital Co., LLC, No. 17-CV-4655 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Dec. 20, 2018 Nealon, J.), the court addressed issues pertaining to a request to amend a medical malpractice Complaint to conform to the evidence adduced during discovery.   According to the Opinion, the Plaintiffs in this matter filed a medical malpractice Complaint against various Defendants involved with the birth and neonatal care of their child.   Following the deposition of one of…
Judge2BMariani.jpg
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…
split.jpg
In the case of Debellis v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., No. 18-CV-214 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 25, 2018 Schwab, J.), the court addressed a Plaintiff’s Motion In Limine to preclude the carrier’s bad faith expert in this UIM bad faith litigation.   The court observed that there continues to be a split of authority on whether expert testimony concerning a carrier’s bad faith is permissible and noted that this was a controversial issue.   Nevertheless, this particular court allowed…
In the case of Goldstein v. Am. States Ins. Co., No. 18-CV-3163 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 28, 2018 Baylson, J.), the Eastern District Federal Court of Pennsylvania denied a Defendant carrier’s Motion to Sever and Stay an Plaintiff’s Bad Faith Claim in a post-Koken litigation.   In this matter, the defense argued that the bad faith claim should be resolved through a bench trial in federal court and the breach of contract claim was to be tried…
Evergreen2BTrees.jpg
In the case of Huffsmith v. PPL Electric Utilities Corp., No. 11-CV-1012 (C.P. Lacka. Co. Nov. 3, 2018 Nealon, J.), the court addressed the appropriate standard for the assessment of damages in a trespass action.   This case arose out of a trespass action filed by the Plaintiff against various Defendants seeking to recover damages for the allegedly intentional removal of fully-grown evergreen trees along the Plaintiffs’ property.   In this decision, the court addressed various Motions…
email.2.jpg
In the case of Hatchigan v. Kaplin Stewart, No. 3040 EDA 2018 (C.P. Phila. Co. Oct. 25, 2018 Anders, J.), the court found that the Defendants were entitled to enforce a settlement agreement of the parties reached by way of emails containing the essential terms of the Defendants’ settlement offer, the Plaintiff’s acceptance of the same, and the required consideration necessary to make a contract enforceable. According to the Opinion, the Plaintiff also executed a…