Lockwood v. Geico General Insurance Company
2014 Alas. LEXIS 79
Alaska2014Background
- Lockwood injured May 21, 2007 by an uninsured drunk driver; Geico offered $750 to settle UM claim; Medical payments exhausted; Lockwood paid out-of-pocket and borrowed to continue treatment; Geico delayed further payment and denied discovery of internal manuals; Settled UM claim for $25,000 in 2010, preserving bad-faith claims; Trial court granted summary judgment for Geico and denied discovery, which this court reverses.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Geico’s delay in UM payments had a reasonable basis | Lockwood argues delay was unreasonable; genuine issue of material fact | Geico cites medical necessity, causation, and damage extent as bases | Summary judgment improper; genuine fact issue exists as to reasonableness |
| Whether trial court abused its discretion by denying discovery of Geico’s manuals | Manuals are relevant under broad discovery rules | Manuals are not directly admissible and sensitive | Discovery order reversed; manuals deemed potentially relevant; remand for further proceedings |
Key Cases Cited
- Hillman v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 855 P.2d 1321 (Alaska 1993) (court deferred defining bad-faith elements; insurer’s denial judged by reasonableness)
- Weiford v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 831 P.2d 1264 (Alaska 1992) (bad-faith requires unreasonableness; intent not strictly required)
- Nicholson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 777 P.2d 1152 (Alaska 1989) (expands good-faith breach analysis in first-party insurance cases)
- Ennen v. Integon Indem. Corp., 268 P.3d 277 (Alaska 2012) (discusses intent vs. unreasonableness in bad-faith context)
- Weber v. Cont’l Ins. Co., ? (Alaska) ((placeholder; not cited in opinion))