KLEIN v. THE HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY
Filing
8
OPINION & ORDER granting 5 Motion to Dismiss without prejudice; that Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to submit an amended complaint that cures, to the extent possible, the deficiencies addressed in this Opinion. Signed by Judge Claire C. Cecchi on 10/27/14. (jd, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF EW JERSEY
ELAINE EIN,
Civil Action No.: 14-1055
Plaintiff,
OPINION & ORDER
V.
HANOVER ThJSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
CECCHI, District Judge.
Before the Court is Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
I 2(b)(6) (ECF No. 5). The Court decides the motion without oral argument pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
78.’ Plaintiff did not submit papers opposing the Motion. The Court’s jurisdiction is based upon diversity.
28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(l). For the reasons set forth below, the Court will grant Defendant’s motion. Plaintiff
shall be given thirty days to submit an amended complaint that cures. to the extent possible,
the
deficiencies addressed below,
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has failed to meet its obligations under an insurance policy,
The Court considers any new arguments not presented by the parties to be waived. See
927 F,2d 1283, 1298 (3d Cir. 1991)
(“It is well established that failure to raise an issue in the district court constitutes a waiver of the
argument.”).
numbered HPY6207557, covering Plaintiffs property (the “Policy”). (Compl.
¶ 4). Plaintiff has alleged
(1) breach of contract and (2) breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing. (Compl.
¶[
9-15).
Defendant. Hanover Insurance Company, argues that both claims should be dismissed because it is not
a party to the Policy. (Def. Br, 4). Defendant avers that the Policy was issued by Citizens Insurance
2
Company. (Def. Br. 3). Both Hanover and Citizens are member companies of the Hanover Insurance
Group, Inc., but each is a distinct legal entity. (Def. Br. 3). In support of its allegations Defendant
provides the Declaration of its employee, James Boos, as well as the “Declarations” page of the Policy
itself. ECF No. 5-2. Both state that Citizens, and not Hanover, issued the Policy. Id.
Normally, a “District Court must accept all of the complaint?s well-pled facts as true” when
determining whether a complaint states a cause of action. Fowler v. UPMC Shadyside, 578 F.3d 203,
211 (3d Cir. 2009). However, the Court may also consider documents “integral to or explicitly relied
upon in the complaint” without converting the motion into one for summary judgment. In re Burlington
Coat Factory Securities Litigation, 114 F.3d 1410, 1426 (3d Cir. 1997).
Despite allegations that Defendant objectively insured her property pursuant to the Policy, the
Policy documents themselves reveal that Defendant is, in fact, not the insurer. Accordingly, Plaintiff has
not alleged a valid contract between Plaintiff and Defendant. This is fatal to Plaintiff’s breach of contract
claim. Muihy v. Implicito, 920 A.2d 678, 689 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2007) (breach of contract
requires showing “that the parties entered into a valid contract”) (citations omitted). Further, without an
underlying contract between the parties, Plaintiff cannot state a claim for breach of the covenant of good
faith and fair dealing. Wade v. Kessler Instiflite, 798 A.2d 1251, 1262 (NJ. 2002) (the breach of the
covenant of good faith and fair dealing cannot be maintained “absent an express or implied contract”).
Accordingly, both counts will be dismissed without prejudice.
2
ECFNo.5-l,
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS on this
th
27
day of October, 2014:
ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6)
(ECF No. 5) is GRANTED: and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant are dismissed without prejudice; and it is
further
ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days to submit an amended complaint that cures,
to the extent possible, the deficiencies addressed in this Opinion.
SO ORDERED.
7)
CLAIRE C. CECCHI, U.S.D.J.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?