Summary
denying motion to dismiss where plaintiff alleged that insurance company used improper document requests to deny plaintiff's claim
Summary of this case from Banks v. Allstate Fire & Cas. Ins. Co.Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11-CV-2190
07-13-2012
MATTHEW SCHLEGEL and JENNIFER SCHLEGEL, His Wife, Plaintiffs, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.
(JUDGE CAPUTO)
ORDER
NOW, this 13th day of July, 2012, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint (Doc. 13) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows:
1. Defendant's Motion is DENIED to the extent it seeks to dismiss Plaintiffs' claims under Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, 73 P.S. § 201-1 et seq., and Pennsylvania's bad faith insurance statute, 42 Pa. C.S.A. § 8371, as predicated on unreasonable document requests;
2. Defendant's Motion is GRANTED in all other respects.
________________________
A. Richard Caputo
United States District Judge