Hakim v. Erie Insurance Exchange
48 Pa. D. & C.5th 245
Pennsylvania Court of Common P...2015Background
- Plaintiffs William and Joann Hakim sued Erie Insurance for UIM/PIP benefits and bad‑faith denial of medical payments after a 2006 motor‑vehicle collision injured William Hakim.
- Erie paid some medical benefits but denied others; Erie had a defense IME performed by Dr. DiBenedetto in 2008. Plaintiffs sought discovery about Dr. DiBenedetto’s finances and communications with Erie.
- Plaintiffs served interrogatories and document requests (including the February 2007 Erie claims manual, adjuster Audrey Ziegler’s claim file, Dr. DiBenedetto’s financial records, and contacts between Erie and Infinity Insurance).
- Erie objected, moved to sever/ stay bad‑faith claims from contractual claims, moved to amend its answer to add affirmative defenses (statute of limitations, bankruptcy), and objected to a proposed subpoena to VSAS for records concerning Dr. DiBenedetto.
- The court considered discoverability rules and precedent on expert bias discovery, claims manuals, personnel/claim files, and procedural limits on interrogatories and pleadings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Production of Erie claims manual (Feb 2007) | Manual is relevant to bad‑faith evaluation and discoverable | Privilege/confidentiality concerns; potential prejudice | Decision stayed: Erie must submit manual in camera within 30 days with privilege log; court will then rule |
| Audrey Ziegler’s claim/personnel file | File is relevant to bad‑faith and contract claims; Plaintiffs will keep confidential | Objections not specifically articulated; some material may be privileged | Ordered produced (with redactions for work product/attorney communications and case valuation) |
| Financial records of Dr. DiBenedetto / subpoena to VSAS | Financial ties to Erie show bias; request for 1099s/W‑2s and VSAS billing records | Financial/tax records are overly broad and intrusive; lesser means (deposition/interrogatories) suffice | Denied: Plaintiffs may use interrogatories/deposition; subpoena to VSAS quashed as unduly burdensome |
| Interrogatory about contacts between Erie and Infinity; interrogatory limit | Requests are relevant; exceed local interrogatory limit but should be allowed | Plaintiffs exceeded 25‑interrogatory limit; objection procedural | Court treated motion as request to exceed limit and granted; Erie must answer or raise other objections |
| Motion to amend new matter to assert statute of limitations and bankruptcy | N/A | Erie seeks leave to add affirmative defenses | Granted; affirmative defenses must be pled with factual specificity |
| Severance and stay of bad‑faith claims and discovery | Bad‑faith evidence may overlap and be relevant; severance unnecessary | Severance needed to avoid prejudice, immunity of privileged materials, inconsistent verdicts; stay discovery on bad‑faith to avoid delay | Severance of bad‑faith claims granted; stay of bad‑faith discovery denied (discovery proceeds) |
Key Cases Cited
- Zappile v. Amex Assur. Co., 928 A.2d 251 (2007) (insurer’s claims manual may be relevant in bad‑faith analysis)
- Bonenberger v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 791 A.2d 378 (2002) (claims manuals can reveal claims‑handling philosophy relevant to bad faith)
- J.S. v. Whetzel, 860 A.2d 1112 (2004) (examining an expert’s relationship with the calling counsel is permissible impeachment material)
- Feldman v. Ide, 915 A.2d 1208 (Pa. Super. 2007) (ordering production of five years of an expert’s personal tax records was overly broad)
- Cooper v. Schoffstall, 905 A.2d 482 (2006) (procedures for probing nonparty expert bias should be less intrusive than production of personal financial records)
- Barrick v. Holy Spirit Hosp. of Sisters of Christian Charity, 91 A.3d 680 (Pa. 2014) (Rule 4003.5 permits expert discovery by interrogatory; further discovery only upon cause shown and subject to court supervision)
- Gunn v. Automobile Ins. Co. of Hartford, 971 A.2d 505 (2009) (staying bad‑faith discovery until contract claim resolution is disfavored; concerns about piecemeal litigation and delay)
- Birth Ctr. v. St. Paul Cos., 787 A.2d 376 (2001) (insurer’s refusal to settle in bad faith can give rise to consequential damages)