Barroso v. Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance
958 F. Supp. 2d 1344
M.D. Fla.2013Background
- Plaintiff sued insurer in Florida state court (Nov 2009) for underinsured motorist (UM) benefits, loss of consortium, and bad faith; bad faith claim was initially dismissed as premature.
- Jury later returned a verdict for Plaintiff on the UM claim; recovery was limited to the $25,000 policy limit.
- Plaintiff sought leave to amend post-verdict to add a bad faith claim; state court granted leave on March 11, 2013.
- Defendant removed to federal court within 30 days of the amendment but more than three years after the original complaint was filed.
- Plaintiff moved to remand; the district court granted remand because removal was untimely under 28 U.S.C. § 1446(c)(1)’s one-year limit applicable to actions not initially removable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the action was initially removable under diversity jurisdiction | The case was not initially removable because the UM recovery was capped at the $25,000 policy limit (below $75,000). | Conceded initial non-removability but argued removal was timely after bad faith claim ripened. | Court held the case was not initially removable (amount in controversy did not meet § 1332). |
| Whether adding the post-verdict bad faith claim restarted the § 1446 removal clock / avoided the one-year limit | Plaintiff argued the one-year limit runs from the original complaint filing and is not reset by adding a claim. | Defendant argued the bad faith claim is a separate, independent cause of action and its addition permitted removal beyond one year. | Court held the amendment did not reset the one-year clock; removal more than one year after commencement was untimely. |
| Whether the amendment constituted a "revival" of the defendant's removal right | Plaintiff: amendment does not revive removal rights. | Defendant: amendment revived/reset removal period and tolled prior time limits. | Court rejected revival theory; amendment does not restart § 1446 timeliness. |
Key Cases Cited
- Burns v. Windsor Ins. Co., 31 F.3d 1092 (11th Cir. 1994) (plaintiff controls forum choice; removal statutes construed narrowly)
- Jones v. LMR Int'l, Inc., 457 F.3d 1174 (11th Cir. 2006) (ambiguities in removal construed against removal)
- Blanchard v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 575 So.2d 1289 (Fla. 1991) (insurance bad-faith claim does not accrue until underlying UM claim is resolved favorably)
- Russell Corp. v. Am. Home Assurance Co., 264 F.3d 1040 (11th Cir. 2001) (one-year removal limitation is a strict jurisdictional constraint and may produce seemingly arbitrary outcomes)