Crowe et al v. Allstate Insurance Company
ORDER re 8 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings . The motion is denied, and the parties shall be entitled to conduct discovery on this claim. Moreover, the parties shall be allowed to conduct discovery on the amount of damages to which Plaintiffs are entitled. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 3/30/2021. (ams)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
MICKEY E. CROWE,
MARY E. CROWE,
ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO.,
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on its own motion following the parties’
supplemental briefing in this action. (Doc. Nos. 19, 20).
This is a dispute over insurance coverage between Plaintiffs Mickey Crowe and Mary
Crowe and Defendant Allstate Insurance Company. Plaintiffs filed this action on March 4, 2020,
in Gaston County Superior Court, seeking a declaratory judgment on the issue of whether
Plaintiffs are entitled to insurance coverage, and also bringing a claim for unfair and deceptive
trade practices under North Carolina law, based on Defendant’s denial of coverage, under N.C.
GEN. STAT. §§ 58-63-15(11) and 75-1.1 et seq. (Doc. No. 1-1).
On April 9, 2020, Defendant removed the action to this Court based on diversity
jurisdiction, under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. (Doc. No. 1). On May 7, 2020, Defendant filed its answer.
(Doc. No. 5). Plaintiffs filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings on May 12, 2020, as to
their claim for declaratory relief only. Defendant filed its own motion for judgment on the
pleadings on May 26, 2020, as to all claims. This Court held a hearing on both parties’ motions
on July 15, 2020. On October 30, 2020, the Court entered an order granting Plaintiffs’ motion
for judgment on the pleadings and denying Defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.
The Court further stated that it was making no ruling at that time on Plaintiffs’ claim for
unfair and deceptive trade practices under North Carolina law, based on Defendant’s denial of
coverage, under N.C. GEN. STAT. §§ 58-63-15(11) and 75-1.1 et seq. The Court gave the parties
additional time to brief this issue, as well as the issue of the amount of coverage to which
Plaintiffs contend they are entitled under the insurance policy. The parties have now submitted
their supplemental briefings on these issues.
The Court finds that, to the extent that Defendant has moved for judgment on the
pleadings as to the merits of Plaintiff’s unfair and deceptive trade practices claim, the motion is
denied, and the parties shall be entitled to conduct discovery on this claim. Moreover, the parties
shall be allowed to conduct discovery on the amount of damages to which Plaintiffs are entitled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: March 30, 2021
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?