In the case of Taylor v. GEICO, No. 2-20-CV-00729-CRE (W.D. Pa. Aug. 4, 2020 Eddy, Chief Mag. J.)(Mem. Op.), the court granted a carrier’s Motion to Dismiss a Plaintiff’s statutory bad faith claim in a UIM matter but allowed the Plaintiff the right to amend.
In this decision by a Chief Magistrate Judge in the Western Federal District Court, it was ruled that the Plaintiff’s Complaint did not hold up against the plausibility standard. The Court noted that a “formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Op. at p. 4.
The Court noted that the Plaintiff’s Complaint did not show anything more than a dispute between the Plaintiff and the carrier over the value of the claim. It was noted that a dispute over the evaluation does not give rise to a bad faith claim; rather, a plaintiff must plead facts to show that the carrier’s evaluation lacked a reasonable basis and that the carrier knew or recklessly disregarded the fact that its evaluation was unreasonable.
This Opinion gives a nice overview of the Rule 12(b)(6) standard of review as well as the elements of a valid bad faith claim.
Anyone wishing to review this decision may click this LINK
I send thanks to Attorney Joseph Hudock of the Pittsburgh law firm of Summers, McDonnell, Hudock, Guthrie & Rauch, P.C. for bringing this case to my attention.