INSURED CANNOT RELY ON (1) FACTS OUTSIDE THE COMPLAINT OR (2) CONCLUSORY ALLEGATIONS TO DEFEAT MOTION TO DISMISS; AND INSURER OWES NO FIDUCIARY DUTY IN UIM CONTEXT (Philadelphia Federal)
This UIM case involved a dispute over the available amount of coverage under an auto policy. The complaint included breach of contract, statutory bad faith, and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing claims. The insurer also believed a breach of fiduciary duty claim may have been alleged. The insurer moved to dismiss all claims.
The insured argued facts outside the complaint in responding to the insurer’s motion to dismiss. These facts may have stated a cause of action for breach of contract had they been properly pleaded, but the court could not consider them in ruling on the motion to dismiss. Thus, the motion to dismiss the contract claim was granted, but without prejudice.
The court also found the insured failed to plead a UIM bad faith claim. As stated, in opposing the motion to dismiss the insured relied on facts not pleaded to argue the carrier improperly refused stacking. Unpleaded facts could not support a bad faith claim, though again, the insured was allowed to amend and presumably assert these factual allegations in a future pleading.
As to the bad faith allegations actually pleaded, these were conclusory and could not make out a plausible bad faith claim.
The conclusory averments included: “[the insurer] committed bad faith by acting with a dishonest purpose and knowingly breaching a duty because of its self-interest …; denying coverage …; collecting premiums and then denying coverage…; and [c]onspiring to create a defense for its own self-interest which its [sic] knows has no factual basis….”
The court further observed there is no fiduciary duty in the UIM context, and dismissed any such claims.
The court finally found the common law bad faith claim to be subsumed in the breach of contract claim, as there is no common law bad faith claim in Pennsylvania outside the contractual duty to act in good faith.
Date of Decision: June 3, 2019
Pommells v. State Farm Insurance, U. S. District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania CIVIL ACTION No. 18-5143, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92435, 2019 WL 2339992 (E.D. Pa. June 3, 2019) (Kelly, J.)
