Grossi v. Travelers Pers. Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 16 December 2013 |
| Parties | Brandon P. GROSSI, An Individual, Appellee v. TRAVELERS PERSONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, A Corporation, Appellant. Brandon P. Grossi, Appellant v. Travelers Personal Insurance Company, A Corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Pennsylvania Superior Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Alan S. Miller, Pittsburgh, for Travelers.
Kelly M. Tocci, Aliquippa, for Grossi.
Before the Court are cross-appeals filed by Defendant, Travelers Personal Insurance Company (Travelers), and Plaintiff, Brandon P. Grossi (Grossi), from the April 18, 2012 order disposing of the parties' cross-motions for post-trial relief, and directing the prothonotary to enter judgmentagainst Travelers and in favor of Grossi for $1,478,815.94. 1 After careful review, we affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for entry of a corrected verdict in accordance with this opinion.
The instant matter stems from a December 24, 2006 automobile accident in which Grossi, a passenger in a vehicle owned by Tarquinio Brothers Bakery, and driven by Michael Tarquinio, was severely injured. Grossi retained counsel, Keith R. McMillen, Esquire, of McMillen, Urick, Tocci, Fouse & Jones, to pursue his personal injury claims. Tarquinio Brothers Bakery had liability and umbrella insurance policies, providing a total coverage of $3,000,000.00. The liability of Michael Tarquinio and Tarquinio Brothers Bakery was not disputed. In addition, Grossi was an insured under his parents' policy with Travelers, which included coverage for $1,000,000.00 in medical benefits and underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in the amount of $300,000.00. Under that policy, Travelers paid approximately $500,000.00 in first party medical expenses and $25,000.00 in lost income to Grossi as of the date of the instant proceedings.
Based on preliminary contacts regarding Grossi's potential coverage under the Travelers policy, Travelers set an initial loss reserve of $1,000.00 for any potential UIM claim.2 On April 21, 2008, based on his assessment that the value of his losses exceeded $3,300,000.00, Grossi, through counsel, notified Travelers of his demand for payment of the full UIM policy limits of $300,000.00. Grossi's demand included an expert's analysis of his future earnings loss resulting, inter alia, from an inability to take over his father's automobile repair business. That loss alone was valued at $4,252,725.00. Trial Court Memorandum Opinion & Findings of Fact, 1I23I12, at 3, ¶ 12.
Grossi's claim was presented to Travelers' claim adjuster, Roxanne Youndt. Youndt reviewed Grossi's demand and prepared a worksheet for Travelers' Major Claims Unit (MCU). Travelers' claims manual specifies that the worksheet is a tool for “evaluating and reserving uninsured and underinsured motorist claimants.” N.T., 10/19–20/11, Plaintiff's exhibit Tab 67, Travelers Liability Best Practices Manual. Youndt valued Grossi's net claim, after deduction of Tarquinio Brothers Bakery's $3,000,000.00 coverage, at about $1,800,000.00. Notwithstanding the Manual's specifications, Youndt's estimate was not based on an independent analysis of Grossi's claim for loss of future earnings.
Without adjusting the $1,000.00 reserve, Youndt transferred Grossi's claim to claims adjuster Andrew W. Makar at Travelers' MCU. On May 22, 2008, Makar responded by letter to Grossi's attorney, expressing the view that Grossi's future earnings loss estimate was “highly speculative,” and further expressing an intent to secure an independent medical examination (IME), a vocational expert, and an economist. Trial Court Memorandum Opinion & Findings of Fact, 1I23I12, at 5, ¶ 20. Makar did not adjust the January 28, 2007 reserve amount of $1,000.00 on Grossi's UIM claim, which remained unchanged throughout the pendency of the claim. Travelers had no further communication with Grossi's counsel explaining the basis for its rejection of his UIM claim. On May 30, 2008, Grossi demanded arbitration. Travelers eventually obtained an IME report on May 7, 2009. Updated reports and other materials in support of his claim were presented to Travelers by Grossi. Travelers, after requesting a continuance of the arbitration hearing, finally obtained a vocational report from its expert, Mark Heckman, although the written report was never made a part of the claims file or reviewed by the adjuster prior to the arbitration hearing.
The UIM claim proceeded to arbitration, on August 6, 2009, resulting in a unanimous gross award in favor of Grossi of $4,000,000.00. Travelers did not appeal the award and promptly paid Grossi the policy UIM limits of $300,000.00, without interest.
On September 29, 2009, Grossi filed a complaint asserting a claim for bad faith under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8371. The matter proceeded to a non-jury trial on October 19 to 21, 2011. Subsequently, the parties submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and presented their closing arguments on January 5, 2012. On January 23, 2012, the trial court announced its findings of fact and conclusions in a memorandum opinion, and issued the following verdict in favor of Grossi.
AND NOW this 23rd day of January, 2012, following a non-jury trial, the Plaintiff has proven by clear and convincing evidence The Travelers Insurance Company acted in bad faith in violation of 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8371, ourt hereby renders a verdict in favor of Plaintiff, Brandon Grossi, and against the Defendant, Travelers, Inc., and awards damages to Plaintiff pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 8371 as follows:
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
¦ ¦ ¦Interest on $300,000.00 underinsured motorist ¦ ¦
¦ ¦(i) ¦[c]overage from April 21, 2008 to September 11, ¦$25,500.00 ¦
¦ ¦ ¦2009; ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦Attorneys fees to McMillen, Urick, Tocci, Fouse ¦ ¦
¦ ¦(ii) ¦& Jones in connection with underinsured motorist¦$26,875.00 ¦
¦ ¦ ¦claim[;] ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦(iii)¦Attorneys fees to McMillen, Urick, Tocci, Fouse ¦$120,687.50 ¦
¦ ¦ ¦& Jones in connection with bad faith claim[;] ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦(iv) ¦Costs of bad faith claim[;] ¦$55,028.44 ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦(v) ¦Punitive damages[;] ¦$1,252,325.00¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦
+--------+-----+------------------------------------------------+-------------¦
¦ ¦ ¦TOTAL VERDICT ¦$1,480,815.94¦
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Trial Court Opinion and Verdict, 1I23I12, at 20–21. The trial court made extensive findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of its verdict. Id.
Both parties filed timely post-verdict motions, which the trial court, on April 18, 2012, denied with the exception that it deducted $2,000.00 of the awarded costs from the verdict and ordered the Prothonotary to enter judgment for Grossi in the amount of $1,478,815.94. On May 11, 2012, Travelers filed a timely notice of appeal. On May 17, 2012, Grossi filed a timely notice of cross-appeal. The trial court did not order the parties to prepare concise statements of errors complained of on appeal. SeePa.R.A.P. 1925(b). On June 11, 2012, this Court, sua sponte, consolidated the appeals. SeePa.R.A.P. 513.
We begin by addressing the following questions Travelers presents on appeal.
1. Whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in concluding that [ ] Grossi had proven by clear and convincing evidence that Travelers acted in bad faith under 42 Pa.C.S. § 8371 in the handling of his underinsured motorist claim?
2. Whether the trial court erred in denying Travelers' Motions for Entry of Judgment or for New Trial where the conclusion that Travelers acted in bad faith was not supported by findings of fact made by the court or was based upon findings of fact not supported by the record such that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence?
3. Whether the trial court erred by crediting the opinion of [ ] Grossi's bad faith expert that the value of [ ] Grossi's claim exceeded the $3,000,000 set off where that same expert valued the same claim for the tortfeasor at substantially less than the $3,000,000 set off?
4. Whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in concluding that punitive damages were warranted under the circumstances?
5. Whether the amount of the punitive damages awarded was arbitrary and contrary to law because it was not supported by the evidence, was not reasonably related to the purposes of punitive damages and was excessive and disproportionate to the conduct?
6. Whether the trial court erred as a matter...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bert Co. v. Matthew Turk, William Collins, Jamie Heynes, David Mcdonnell, First Nat'l Ins. Agency, LLC
...because the insurer acted with "deliberate indifference and, in some cases, blatant dishonesty"); see also Grossi v. Travelers Personal Ins. Co. , 79 A.3d 1141, 1160 (Pa. Super. 2013) (accord).13 See Noble Biomaterials v. Argentum Med., LLC , No. 3:08-CV-1305, 2011 WL 4458796, at *8 (M.D. P......
-
Lomas v. Kravitz
...it comports with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution."Grossi v. Travelers Personal Insurance Co., 79 A.3d 1141, 1157 (Pa.Super.2013) (quoting Hollock v. Erie Insurance Exchange, 842 A.2d 409, 420 (Pa.Super.2004) ), appeal denied, 627 Pa. 766,......
-
Mifflinburg Tel., Inc. v. Criswell
...S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007).319 Phillips v. Cricket Lighters , 584 Pa. 179, 883 A.2d 439, 445 (2005).320 Grossi v. Travelers Pers. Ins. Co ., 79 A.3d 1141, 1157 (2013)321 State Farm v. Campbell, 538 U.S. 408, 123 S.Ct. 1513, 155 L.Ed.2d 585 (2003) (Kennedy, J.).322 Id.323 Hensley v. ......
-
Papurello v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co.
...have approved § 8371 punitive damages awards of four to five times the amount of compensatory damages. Grossi v. Travelers Pers. Ins. Co., 79 A.3d 1141, 1160–61 (Pa.Super.Ct.2013) ; Davis v. Fidelity Nat'l Ins. Co., 32 Pa. D. & C. 5th 179, 2013 WL 10230561, at *12 (Pa.Ct.Com.Pl. Aug. 15, 20......