Date: 07-02-2024

Case Style:

Jenna Sievers and Joel Sievers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

Case Number: 2:23-CV-995

Judge: Margaret Strickland

Court: United States District Court for the District of New Mexico (Bernalillo County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Insurance Lawyer Directory

Defendant's Attorney: Taryn M. Kaselonis, Pablo Andres Seifert, and Courtenay L. Keller

Description:

Albquerque, New Mexico insurance lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a bad faith theory.

On August 16, 2017, Plaintiff Jenna Sievers (“Jenna”) was driving her 2011 Chevrolet Camero when it was struck from behind by another vehicle. ECF No. 1-1 ¶ 6. The collision forced Jenna's vehicle off the road and caused damage to the vehicle and injuries to Jenna. Id. ¶ 8.

Jenna's vehicle was insured by Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”) under a Policy purchased by her father, Plaintiff Joel Sievers. Id. ¶ 5. The Policy provided for uninsured/underinsured motorist (“UM/UIM”) coverage of $250,000.00/$500,000.00 per occurrence.

Shortly after the accident, State Farm was notified of Jenna's UM/UIM claim. Id. ¶ 10. State Farm was advised through the claim specialist handling Jenna's claim that she was still suffering from the injuries caused by the accident and was pursuing a claim for underinsured motorist coverage under the Policy. Id.

Jenna filed a lawsuit against the driver of the other vehicle and his insurance company in the District Court of Roosevelt County, New Mexico. Id. ¶ 11. Plaintiffs, with State Farm's permission, settled with the driver of the other vehicle and his insurance company for a full policy limit, which were the minimum limits established by New Mexico statute. Id. ¶ 13.

On August 15, 2023, Plaintiffs filed the instant Complaint in New Mexico state court, alleging that State Farm has wrongfully failed to provide any UM/UIM coverage under the Policy. See ECF No. 1-1. The Complaint contains the following causes of action:

• Count I seeks UM/UIM benefits under the Policy, id. ¶¶ 17-19;

• Count II alleges violations of New Mexico's Unfair Trade Practices Act (“UPA”), N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 57-12-2(D)(7), (D)(15), (D)(17), and 57-13-2(E) id. ¶¶ 20-24;

• Count III alleges a violation of the New Mexico Insurance Code's Trade Practices and Frauds Act, N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 59A-16-20(A), (B), (C), (E), (G), and (N), Id. ¶¶ 25-29;

• Count IV alleges a claim for bad faith breach of the insurance contract, id. ¶¶ 30-34;

• Count V alleges a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, id. ¶¶ 3537;

• Count VI alleges a breach of contract, id. ¶¶ 38-42;

• Count VII asserts a claim for punitive damages, id. ¶¶ 43-45; and

• Count VIII alleges a claim for negligent misrepresentation, id. ¶¶ 46-50.

On November 10, 2023, State Farm removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico based on diversity of citizenship. ECF No. 1.

Also on November 10, 2023, State Farm filed the instant Motion to Dismiss Count 8 for failure to state a claim. ECF No. 3. On November 14, 2023, the Parties filed a Joint Motion for Stay of Proceedings to allow the Parties to engage in settlement negotiations. ECF No. 6. On November 15, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Jerry H. Ritter granted the Motion for Stay of Proceedings and stayed proceedings for 90 days. ECF No. 7. Judge Ritter subsequently extended the stay to April 15, 2023, ECF No. 9, and again to May 20, 2024, ECF No. 12. The Parties failed to settle, and on May 22, 2023, Judge Ritter issued an Initial Scheduling Order, ECF No. 14, effectively lifting the stay.

To date, Plaintiffs still have not filed a Response to the Motion to Dismiss, and the deadline for doing so has long since passed.

Outcome: Motion to dismiss granted.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: