A Federal District Judge followed settled Florida law in ruling that a Florida policyholder's conduct is relevant to her claims of bad-faith-failure-to-settle. And that her lawyer's conduct is relevant too:
Opinions Regarding Anderson's and Her Counsel's Motives
Plaintiffs anticipate that [the defendant liability carrier] will attempt to elicit opinions about [the underlying plaintiff's-policyholder's] and her counsel's motives and beliefs to the extent that they “set up” a bad faith claim. For example, Plaintiffs state that certain witnesses may testify that [the underlying plaintiff and policyholder] secretly hoped [the defendant liability carrier] would not accept her settlement offers so she could pursue a bad faith case. Or that [her] counsel intentionally withheld certain medical reports in an attempt to set up a bad faith claim. This issue has been squarely addressed by other courts in this district; specifically, in prior bad faith cases, the courts have ruled that evidence regarding the motive and conduct of the underlying plaintiff and her attorney is relevant and should not be prohibited as long as it is not purely speculative.
Gonzalez v. GEICO General Ins. Co., No. 8:15-cv-240-T-30TBM, 2017 WL 39113, at *1-*2 (M.D. Fla. January 4, 2017).
Settled law in Florida.
Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2017 by Dennis J. Wall. All Rights Reserved.