Allstate Insurance Company, Allstate Fire and Casualty Insurance Company, Allstate Indemnity Company and Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company (collectively Allstate) filed a response to the defendants, Auto Glass America LLC (AGA) and its owner, Charles Isaly’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter and jurisdiction.
The defendants previously claimed there is insufficient evidence that supports each plaintiff suffered damages of at least $75,000. Allstate alleged as of January 2020 there were 316 small claims pending against Allstate Fire & Casualty with nearly $1.7 million at issue, meanwhile, 40 small claims suits were pending against Allstate Indemnity with approximately $214,000 at issue. According to the company there were also 329 small claims suits pending against Allstate Insurance with more than $1.8 million at issue.
“It has become apparent that [the] defendants’ motion is brought in bad faith despite their knowledge that the amount in controversy is clearly satisfied for each plaintiff,” a portion of Allstate’s response reads. “In telephone discussions regarding mediation, [the] defendants’ counsel declined to provide a demand to resolve the pending small claims cases filed by AGA against Allstate, expressing concern that doing so would undermine [the] defendants’ motion to dismiss—presumably by providing an admission that the amount in controversy far exceeds the jurisdictional minimum.”
The defendants recently filed a motion that sought to have the insurance company provide a clear breakdown of its original calculated damages which Allstate claimed exceeded $75,000. According to AGA and Isaly, Allstate’s damage disclosures failed to provide a computation of each category of damages claimed for each Allstate plaintiff against each separate defendant. The pair requested Allstate to voluntarily provide its initial disclosures.
According to Allstate’s response, the resulting amount in controversy in the small claims cases pending when the company filed its complaint for each Plaintiff, is as follows:
|Plaintiff||Pending small claims||Amount of invoices in dispute (Total invoice minus total payments)||Attorney’s fees ($5,000 per claim)||Total amount in controversy|
|Allstate Fire & Casualty||253||$67,604.85||$1,265,000||$1,332,604.85|
|Allstate Property & Casualty||53||$12,504.72||$265,000||$277,504.72
The lawsuit began with Allstate’s complaint alleging that both AGA and Isaly allegedly pressured its insureds into hiring them for windshield replacements, while obtaining assignment of benefits (AOBs). The lawsuit began to heat up, as AGA and Isaly responded to Allstate’s emergency motion 24 hours before the presiding judge issued an order. To which AGA and Isaly filed another motion against Allstate. Shortly after a mediation was scheduled.
The insurance company previously urged the court to deny AGA and Isaly’s motion to compel Allstate to provide its pricing agreements. Allstate cited confidentiality as its reason for not providing its pricing agreements. However the presiding judge ordered the insurance company to produce its pricing agreements.
From there AGA and Isaly responded to Allstate’s emergency protective order. The presiding judge then issued an order regarding the emergency motion. Last week Allstate requested additional time to meet with the defendants for mediation, to which the judge granted parts and dismissed parts. Ultimately the Court extended the mediation deadline until May 29, 2020. Following the mediation extension, Allstate filed an unopposed motion that requested additional time for the insurance company to respond to the defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. To which the defendants responded with another motion to compel computations of each category of damages claimed.
Look to a future edition of glassBYTEs for continued coverage of the suit.