Federal Court Orders Remand in Pennsylvania Bad Faith Insurance Case Involving UIM Claim

In the case of Winner v. Progressive Adv. Ins. Co., the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dealt with a complex situation involving a plaintiff’s motion to remand. The plaintiff, injured in an auto accident, was nearing a settlement with the tortfeasor (the person at fault) when he contacted his Underinsured Motorist (UIM) carrier to open a claim. However, the adjuster assigned to the case shared information about the plaintiff’s involvement in a subsequent accident (which resulted only in property damage) with the tortfeasor’s attorney. This led to a request for more discovery time to investigate the second accident.

The plaintiff then sued his UIM carrier, the adjuster, and her supervisor in State Court, alleging bad faith and violations of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL). The defendants sought removal to Federal Court, arguing the adjuster and supervisor were fraudulently joined. The Federal Court, however, found that a state court would likely entertain a UTPCPL claim against the adjuster and supervisor. This was based on the allegations that they intentionally interfered with the plaintiff’s settlement negotiations before investigating or deciding on the UIM claim, aiming to reduce the carrier’s financial responsibility.

Thus, the Federal Court granted the plaintiff’s motion to remand, stating that the defendants were not fraudulently joined and that dismissing the claims at this stage was premature. The decision underscores the importance of careful argumentation and the role of adjusters in insurance claims.