Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hayes v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co.

United States District Court, D. Nebraska

April 13, 2017

ERIC D. HAYES, Plaintiff.
v.
METROPOLITAN PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

          ERIC D. HAYES, Plaintiff. Attorneys for Plaintiff

          METROPOLITAN PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, ENGLES, KETCHAM, OLSON & KEITH, P.C.

          ORDER ON FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE

         A final pretrial conference was held on the 11th day of April 2017. Appearing for the parties as counsel were:

         For Plaintiff: C.G. (Dooley) Jolly, #21275 Patrick J. Sullivan, #20303 Adams & Sullivan, PC, LLO

         For Defendant: Michael L. Moran, #24042 Dan H. Ketcham, #18930 ENGLES, KETCHAM. OLSON & KEITH. P.C.

         (A) Exhibits. See attached Joint Exhibit List.

         Caution: Upon express approval of the judge holding the pretrial conference for good cause shown, the parties may be authorized to defer listing of exhibits or objections until a later date to be specified by the judge holding the pretrial conference. The mere listing of an exhibit on an exhibit list by a party does not mean it can be offered into evidence by the adverse party without all necessary evidentiary prerequisites being met.

         (B) Uncontroverted Facts.The parties have agreed that the following may be accepted as established facts for purposes of this case only:

1. Plaintiff. Eric D. Hayes ("Hayes") was at all material times a resident of Springfield, Sarpy County, Nebraska.
2. Defendant. Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company ("Met") is an insurance company licensed to transact business in the State of Nebraska.
3. On or about October 25. 2007, a Homeowner Application for a Homeowners Insurance Policy No. 8205839250 to insure property located at 480 South 6 Street, Springfield, Nebraska ("insured property") was completed.
4. On January 24, 2013, the residence was destroyed by fire.
5. At the time of the fire the insured property was insured under MetLife Auto &. Home Homeowners Insurance Policy (Policy No. 8205839250) with policy period November 17, 2012 to November 17. 2013 ("the Policy*').
6. On August 5, 2014. Engles. on behalf of Met. sent to Plaintiffs counsel a letter stating that Met was voiding the Policy ab initio based on Plaintiffs material misrepresentation in the insurance Application and that Met would pay the Springfield State Bank the balance of the mortgage note for the Residence.
7. Met issued a check to Plaintiff for $16,665.65 representing the return of all premiums paid with interest. Such check was not accepted by Plaintiff.
8. Plaintiff filed this action on October 17, 2014.

         (C) Controverted and Unresolved Issues. The issues remaining to be determined and unresolved matters for the court's attention are:

         PLAINTIFF'S CONTROVERTED AND UNRESOLVED ISSUES

         1. Whether Defendant engaged in bad faith investigation, and/or handling of the Plaintiffs claim.

         2. Whether Defendant had a reasonable basis to deny Plaintiff his benefits under the policy.

         3. The amount of Plaintiffs recovery including pre-judgment interests and attorney's fees.

         DEFENDANT'S CONTROVERTED AND UNRESOLVED ISSUES

         1. Whether rescission of an insurance policy voids the contractual relationship between an insurer and its insured.

         2. Whether the covenants of good faith and fair dealing are dependent on the existence of a contractual relationship between and insurer and a claimant.

         3. Whether a claim for bad faith against an insurance carrier can exist in the absence of an insurance contract (i.e. policy) between the insurer and the one claiming bad faith.

         4. Whether Defendant's rescission of the policy precludes Plaintiff from proving bad faith.

         If the Court concludes that a claim for bad faith can exist in the absence of a contractual relationship, the following ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.