Van Der Weide v. Cincinnati Ins. Co.
Decision Date | 30 June 2017 |
Docket Number | No. C14-4100-LTS,C14-4100-LTS |
Parties | TIM VAN DER WEIDE, Plaintiff, v. CINCINNATI INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa |
This case is before me on defendant's motion (Doc. No. 40) for partial summary judgment. Plaintiff has filed a resistance (Doc. No. 41) and defendant has filed a reply (Doc. No. 44). No party has requested oral argument and, in any event, I find that oral argument is not necessary. See N.D. Ia. L.R. 7(c). The motion is fully submitted and ready for decision.
Plaintiff Tim Van Der Weide commenced this action against defendant Cincinnati Insurance Company (Cincinnati) on November 7, 2014, by filing a three-count complaint (Doc. No. 1). He asserts claims of (1) breach of insurance contract, (2) bad faith and (3) punitive damages, all in his individual capacity and as trustee of the Tim Van Der Weide Revocable Trust, assignees of Bouma & Company, Inc. (Bouma), and United Fire & Casualty Co. (United Fire). On December 5, 2014, Cincinnati filed an answer (Doc. No. 4) in which it denies liability and asserts various defenses. Trial is scheduled to begin January 29, 2018.
On August 11, 2015, Van Der Weide filed a motion for partial summary judgment. Doc. No. 9. On September 17, 2015, Cincinnati filed a motion for summary judgment. Doc. No. 15. On October 28, 2015, United States District Judge Mark W. Bennett, to whom this case was then assigned, entered an order (Doc. No. 20) regarding those motions. Judge Bennett determined that the question of whether the faulty workmanship of a subcontractor causing consequential damages beyond the defective work product itself may constitute an "occurrence" was an unresolved question of Iowa law until that same day, when the Iowa Court of Appeals decided that question in the affirmative in National Surety Corp. v. Westlake Investments, LLC, 872 N.W.2d 409 (Iowa Ct. App. 2015). Doc. No. 20 at 1. As a result, Judge Bennett directed the parties to submit additional briefing in light of National Surety.
On November 18, 2015, Cincinnati filed an unresisted motion to stay further proceedings while the Iowa Supreme Court reviewed the National Surety decision. Doc. No. 23. On November 19, 2015, Judge Bennett granted the stay pending the decision of the Iowa Supreme Court. Doc. No. 25. On June 10, 2016, the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. See National Surety Corp. v. Westlake Investments, L.L.C., 880 N.W.2d 724 (Iowa 2016).1
On January 12, 2017, I granted Van Der Weide's motion for partial summary judgment regarding Cincinnati's duty to defend and denied Cincinnati's motion for summary judgment. Doc. No. 39. I found that the CGL policy at issue in this case is so similar to the one in National Surety that the Iowa Supreme Court's holding in National Surety controls my construction of that policy. Id. at 13-14. I further found that coverage had been triggered by virtue of an "occurrence" and "as a matter of law that a duty to defend arose no later than May 5, 2014, after Cincinnati was put on notice of allegations that defective work by Bouma's subcontractor caused damage to the home to occur during the policy period." Id. at 17.
On February 23, 2017, Cincinnati filed the instant motion for partial summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the bad faith and punitive damages claims. Doc. No. 40.
I previously summarized the factual history of this case as follows:
Doc. No. 39 at 2-4 (footnote omitted). As for the insurance policies at issue, I explained:
To continue reading
Request your trial