ROPPA v. GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY
||GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY
||October 26, 2010
||US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
||Lisa Pupo Lenihan
|Nature of Suit:
|Cause of Action:
|Jury Demanded By:
Access additional case information on PACER
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
|January 19, 2011
MEMORANDUM ORDER indicating that, for reasons stated within, that the Motion to Dismiss Count II of the Complaint filed by Defendant GEICO Indemnity Company 4 is granted in part and denied in part. Said Motion is granted with respect to those alle gations of bad faith conduct which are preempted by § 1797 of the MVFRL, enumerated at 48(a)-(d) and 48(f) - (i) of the Complaint, and Plaintiffs statutory bad faith claim is dismissed with prejudice to the extent it is predicated upon the alleg ations enumerated in 48(a) - (d) and 48(f) (i) of the Complaint. Said Motion is denied to the extent Plaintiff's statutory bad faith claim is predicated upon allegations of GEICO's abuse of the PRO process as set forth in 48(e) and 48(j) of the Complaint; that the Report and Recommendation 14 of Chief Magistrate Judge Lenihan, dated 12/29/10, is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 1/19/11. (jg)
|December 29, 2010
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 4 MOTION to Dismiss Count II of the Complaint filed by Defendant GEICO INDEMNITY COMPANY, recommending that Defendant's Motion be granted in part and denied in part. Objections to R&R due by 1/18/2011. Signed by Chief Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 12/29/2010. (clh)
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system.
A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?