Filed: Sep. 16, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 16, 2015
Summary: ORDER DENYING THE MOTION TO DISMISS AND STAYING THE BAD-FAITH CLAIM ROBERT L. HINKLE , District Judge . The plaintiff Michael Andy Gunn alleges that he suffered damages in a vehicle crash caused by a tortfeasor whose liability insurance was insufficient to cover Mr. Gunn's damages. Mr. Gunn had $100,000 in underinsured-motorist coverage through the defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. In this action Mr. Gunn asserts claims against State Farm for the full amount of Stat
Summary: ORDER DENYING THE MOTION TO DISMISS AND STAYING THE BAD-FAITH CLAIM ROBERT L. HINKLE , District Judge . The plaintiff Michael Andy Gunn alleges that he suffered damages in a vehicle crash caused by a tortfeasor whose liability insurance was insufficient to cover Mr. Gunn's damages. Mr. Gunn had $100,000 in underinsured-motorist coverage through the defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. In this action Mr. Gunn asserts claims against State Farm for the full amount of State..
More
ORDER DENYING THE MOTION TO DISMISS AND STAYING THE BAD-FAITH CLAIM
ROBERT L. HINKLE, District Judge.
The plaintiff Michael Andy Gunn alleges that he suffered damages in a vehicle crash caused by a tortfeasor whose liability insurance was insufficient to cover Mr. Gunn's damages. Mr. Gunn had $100,000 in underinsured-motorist coverage through the defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. In this action Mr. Gunn asserts claims against State Farm for the full amount of State Farm's underinsured-motorist coverage (count 1), for bad faith (count 2), and for a declaratory judgment establishing the full amount of Mr. Gunn's damages resulting from the crash (count 3).
State Farm has moved to dismiss counts 2 and 3. Under settled Florida law, the bad-faith claim in count 2 cannot proceed until State Farm's underlying liability is established on count 1. See, e.g., Blanchard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 575 So.2d 1289 (Fla.1991); Maraist v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 4:12-cv-266-RH/CAS, 2012 WL 3536759 (N.D. Fla. Aug. 13, 2012). Even so, in precisely these circumstances, some courts have stayed, rather than dismissed, a bad-faith claim. See, e.g., Lawton-Davis v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 6:14-cv-1157-Orl-37FJK, 2014 WL 6674458 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2014). And some courts have allowed a declaratory-judgment claim to proceed, thus eliminating the possibility that a jury will return a verdict on the amount of damages caused by the underlying tortfeasor's actions but that the verdict will somehow not be binding if the same issue is presented in a later bad-faith trial. See Pici v. 21st Century Centennial Ins. Co., 8:14-cv-1835-T-36TGW, 2015 WL 404250 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 8, 2015); Leuty v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 8:13-cv-3038-T-35MAP, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166046 (M.D. Fla. June 16, 2014).
As a matter of discretion, I choose to take that approach here. The amount of damages caused by the underlying tort presents an actual dispute that is ripe for determination and that should be resolved in a reliable, efficient, and fair manner— not in successive proceedings that are unnecessarily expensive and delayed.
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 4, is DENIED.
2. All proceedings on count 2 are stayed until otherwise ordered.
SO ORDERED.
