Morris v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company involved discovery disputes in a UIM breach of contract and bad faith case. The court denied a motion to quash the deposition of the insurer’s designated representative on the basis that the deposition notice was vague and overbroad; but did quash the deposition of the insurer’s former president and CEO.
The court (1) granted a motion to limit discovery of information from other cases; (2) denied a motion to quash “with respect to information regarding the SI Unit or Low Impact Unit as it relates to this case”; and (3) denied a motion for protective order on reserve information. The court noted the split in authority on discovery of reserves, but agreed with the line of cases, including cases from the Middle District, ruling in favor of discovery.
Date of Decision: August 18, 2015
Morris v. USAA Cas. Ins. Co., CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-CV-1664, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108966 (M.D. Pa. August 18, 2015) (Kosik, J.)