In Feingold v. State Farm Insurance Company, the complaint alleged various conspiracy claims against the insurer and others, to deprive monetary awards to UIM claimants. As to the bad faith allegations, the court found the plaintiffs merely averred that the insurer did not make a good faith effort to resolve or pay a UIM claim. However, Pennsylvania is a fact pleading state, and the court found there were no material facts pled as to how the insurer acted in bad faith. This was found to be a boilerplate averment without any factual support, and thus the claim was dismissed with prejudice.
Date of Decision: August 12, 2015
Feingold v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., Jan. Term 2015, NO. 2058, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia, 2015 Phila. Ct. Com. Pl. LEXIS 232 (C.C.P. Phila. August 12, 2015) (New, J.)