TRIALCOURTDECISIONS
021
Empire Talent v. Auto-Owners
February 12, 2014
U.S. District Court
Don Myles and Patrick Gorman
Don Myles and Patrick Gorman recently obtained a unanimous
verdict in a breach of contract “reasonable expectations” case.
Plaintiff Empire Talent & Modeling filed suit against Auto-Owners Insurance Company for breach of the insurance contract
by not paying the policy limit of $100,000 for lost media and
talent portfolios. Plaintiff also alleged bad faith and intentional
infliction of emotional distress.
Plaintiff argued that Defendant Auto-Owners denied the claim
for lost media and talent portfolios without a reasonable basis.
It also argued that Defendants breached the insurance contract
by not paying the policy limit after being presented with proof
of loss. Mr. Myles and Mr. Gorman, counsel for Defendant,
Auto-Owners, argued that Defendant’s conduct was reasonable and had correctly interpreted the insurance policy.
The Court granted Auto-Owners’ motion for summary judgment on bad faith, punitive damages, and intentional infliction
of emotional distress. It denied summary judgment on the
breach of contract claim, finding a question of fact on Plaintiff’s
claim for reasonable expectations. At trial, Defendant argued
that its independent insurance agent never made any representations inconsistent with the policy, and that Plaintiff had
unreasonable expectations regarding how a claim would be
paid. After hearing the evidence, the jury returned a unanimous
defense verdict (12-0) within two hours.
North 43rd Enterprises v. Hartford
January 30, 2014
Maricopa County Superior Court
Bill Caravetta
JSH RESOURCE ALERT!
State Judicial Profiles
Bill Caravetta, a Partner at Jones, Skelton & Hochuli, recently
obtained summary judgment in a $4.2 million bad faith case.
The bad faith and breach of contract lawsuit stemmed from a
commercial roof claim following a severe hail storm, which hit
the Phoenix area on October 10, 2010. The Plaintiff, North 43rd
Enterprises, retained Texas based Doyle-Raisner to bring the
bad faith action against Hartford, who insured the building at
the time of the storm.
USLAW has released the 2014 edition of State
Judicial Profiles by County, which provides
insight into local courts and juries from USLAW
member firms across the country. Through its
annual State Judicial Profile by County resource,
USLAW offers a judicial profiles for all fifty
states. The profiles provide clients with additional insight into the markets where they have
legal matters. The profiles are supported by the
common consensus of many lawyers whose
understanding of each jurisdiction is based on
personal experience and opinion. County-bycounty comparisons are conducted in-state, not
between states. The 2014 State Judicial Profile by
County is available by clicking here: http://web.
uslaw.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/2014_
USLAW_JudicialProfiles.pdf.
Following an extensive investigation by Hartford, and based
on numerous expert opinions, Hartford determined that North
43rd’s roof had not sustained hail damage necessitating replacement. Plaintiff’s experts disagreed and filed suit in federal
court. Plaintiff’s owner, Robert Howe, admitted in his deposition
that Hartford “had a reasonable basis to deny the claim” based
on its experts’ opinions. He conceded that Hartford did not act
in bad faith and admitted there was no basis for the punitive
damages claim.
Based on these admissions, Hartford, through counsel Bill Caravetta, moved for summary judgment. Following oral argument,
U.S. District Court Judge Ve ɑ