Opinion
4:21-cv-1161-DPM
02-09-2024
ROSE CHADWICK, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated PLAINTIFF v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY DEFENDANT
ORDER
D.P. MARSHALL JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
The Court is working through the long-pending motions and would appreciate the parties' help on these questions. Simultaneous briefs (no more than five pages) due on 20 February 2024.
1. Is the phrase “actual cash value” in State Farm's policy ambiguous? Why or why not?
2. Assuming the phrase is ambiguous, is its meaning a question of law for the Court or of fact for the jury? AMI Civ. 2412 and comment (2023).
3. Assuming the phrase is ambiguous, does its meaning turn on disputed extrinsic evidence of record? If yes, please identify that evidence. Smith v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Co., 340 Ark. 335, 341, 10 S.W.3d 846, 850 (2000).
The Court thanks the parties for their thoughts on these issues.
So Ordered.