From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peerless Wall v. Synchronics

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Sep 28, 2000
234 F.3d 1265 (3d Cir. 2000)

Summary

holding that the insurer's failure to send letters every forty-five days explaining why the claim had not yet been evaluated did not create a material issue of fact regarding bad faith

Summary of this case from Perez-Garcia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Opinion

No. 00-3316.

September 28, 2000.

W.D.Pa., 85 F.Supp.2d 519.


DECISIONS WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Peerless Wall v. Synchronics

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Sep 28, 2000
234 F.3d 1265 (3d Cir. 2000)

holding that the insurer's failure to send letters every forty-five days explaining why the claim had not yet been evaluated did not create a material issue of fact regarding bad faith

Summary of this case from Perez-Garcia v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

finding that "the NJLAD prohibits employers from discriminating in employment on numerous bases, but these do not include political affiliation."

Summary of this case from Shulman v. Facebook.com
Case details for

Peerless Wall v. Synchronics

Case Details

Full title:Peerless Wall Window Coverings, Inc. v. Synchronics, Inc

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Sep 28, 2000

Citations

234 F.3d 1265 (3d Cir. 2000)

Citing Cases

Rowe v. Nationwide Ins. Co.

"Delay is a relevant factor in determining whether bad faith has occurred, but a long period of time between…

Rowe v. Nationwide Ins. Co.

“Delay is a relevant factor in determining whether bad faith has occurred, but a long period of time between…