Daugherty v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company
3:25-cv-00518
M.D. Tenn.May 6, 2025Background
- Plaintiff Hayden Daugherty, a Tennessee resident, sued Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Company (a Delaware corporation) after a car accident in Arizona involving an uninsured motorist.
- Daugherty alleged Allstate failed to properly investigate or pay his uninsured motorist claim and failed to inform him of his rights under the policy.
- The lawsuit was originally filed in Mohave County Superior Court, Arizona, and then removed to the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona by Allstate.
- Allstate moved to transfer the case to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, citing a forum selection clause in the insurance contract.
- Plaintiff did not file a response opposing the motion to transfer.
- The court considered the forum selection clause, convenience of parties and witnesses, and the relevance of Tennessee law in deciding the motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enforcement of forum-selection | No response or argument | Policy requires suit to be brought in Tennessee | Enforced; clause is valid and controlling |
| Convenience of parties and witnesses | Not argued | Both parties are out-of-state; witnesses/docs in TN | Factors favor transfer to TN |
| Governing law familiarity | Not argued | Tennessee law governs under the policy | Factor favors transfer to TN |
| Failure to oppose transfer motion | No response | Plaintiff's silence consents to the transfer | Court may summarily grant the motion |
Key Cases Cited
- Atlantic Marine Const. Co., Inc. v. U.S. Dist. Court for W. Dist. of Texas, 571 U.S. 49 (2013) (forum-selection clauses are given controlling weight in most cases)
- M/S Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co., 407 U.S. 1 (1972) (forum selection clauses are presumptively valid and enforceable)
- Jones v. GNC Franchising, Inc., 211 F.3d 495 (9th Cir. 2000) (factors relevant to transfer of venue analysis)
- Decker Coal Co. v. Commonwealth Edison Co., 805 F.2d 834 (9th Cir. 2000) (party arguing for transfer must make a strong showing of inconvenience)