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.

O'Connor v. GEICO Indemnity Co.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

March 21, 2018

KEVIN PAUL O'CONNOR, Plaintiff,
v.
GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant.

          ORDER

          JULIE S. SNEED, UNTIED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (“Motion”) (Dkt. 20) and Defendant's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Compel (Dkt. 21). For the reasons the follow, Plaintiff's Motion is granted in part and denied in part.

         BACKGROUND

         On May 23, 2017, Plaintiff brought this bad faith action against Defendant GEICO Indemnity Company (“GEICO”) in the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit in Pinellas County, Florida. (Dkt. 2.) On May 23, 2017, GEICO removed this action to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). (Dkt. 1.) Plaintiff alleges that GEICO acted in bad faith in its handling of the bodily injury claim brought by Plaintiff against GEICO's insured Paul Wedmore arising from an automobile accident that occurred on January 26, 2012 (“underlying action”). (Dkt. 2.) After the accident, GEICO rejected Plaintiff's demand to tender the policy limits of Mr. Wedmore's policy on April 3, 2012. (Dkt. 20 at 2.) Plaintiff then sued Mr. Wedmore. (Id.) After a jury trial, partial final judgment was entered against Mr. Wedmore and in favor of Plaintiff, followed by a judgment for attorney's fees and costs against Mr. Wedmore. (Dkt. 2 ¶¶ 11-13.) Plaintiff now seeks a declaratory judgment against GEICO declaring that the insurance policy issued by GEICO to Mr. Wedmore affords coverage for the judgment on attorney's fees and costs entered against Mr. Wedmore. (Id. ¶¶ 15-20.) Plaintiff also asserts claims for breach of contract and common law bad faith against GEICO. (Id. ¶¶ 21-33.)

         On August 4, 2017, Plaintiff served GEICO with an Initial Request for Production. (Dkt. 20-13.) Request Number 5 sought a complete copy of the personnel files, from date of employment through 2013, of the following GEICO employees: (a) Altaira Hawkins; (b) any and all supervisors who supervised Altaira Hawkins in 2012; (c) Marcy Jenkosfky; (d) any and all supervisors who supervised Marcy Jenkofsky in 2012; (e) any other GEICO employees who evaluated or made recommendations regarding the settlement of Plaintiff's claims from the date of loss until January 2013. (Dkt. 20-13 at 3.) Additionally, Request Number 6 sought:

         A complete copy of any and all portions of GEICO's business plans for the Lakeland, Florida office for the years 2011 through 2013 which in any way discuss or relate to the following subject matter:

(a) Average loss payments and/or severity for bodily injury liability coverages;
(b) Evaluations, forecasts, and/or assumptions regarding conditions affecting the severity of bodily injury claims;
(c) Negotiating with claimants and/or claimants' attorneys;
(d) Good faith and/or bad faith claims handling;
(e) Company profits and/or market share;
(f) Evaluations of the quality of bodily injury liability claims handling; and
(g) Bodily injury liability claims handling goals and methods to achieve those goals.

(Id. at 3-4.) GEICO served its responses on September 14, 2017, objecting to Requests 5 and 6. (Dkt. 20-14.) Plaintiff now seeks to compel the ...


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.