V
I R G I N I A:
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE COUNTY OF
CHESTERFIELD
KAREN K.
FARROW )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) At Law No. ___________
)
ALLSTATE
INDEMNITY COMPANY, )
an Illinois corporation, )
)
Defendant. )
AMENDED
MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
COMES NOW the plaintiff, Karen K.
Farrow ("Farrow"), by counsel, and as and for her Amended Motion for
Judgment against the defendant, Allstate Indemnity Company
("Allstate"), states as follows:
Count
I
1. Farrow
is an individual who has, at all times relevant hereto, resided at XXXX XXXXXXX
XXXX, Richmond, Virginia 23236, in the
County of Chesterfield.
2. Allstate
is a corporation organized and operating pursuant to the laws of the State of
Illinois, which is engaged, inter alia, in the business of providing
insurance on automobiles.
3. Under
a closed-end motor vehicle lease agreement dated July 19, 1995 (the "Lease
Agreement"), Farrow, t/a XXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX,
Richmond, Virginia 23235, leased from
Lexus Financial Services, a division of Toyota Motor Credit Corporation
("TMCC"), a 1995 Lexus LS 400 4-door sedan, Vehicle Identification
Number JT8UF22EXS0030399 (the "Car"). A copy of the Lease Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein.
4. Farrow
purchased an automobile insurance policy on the Car from Allstate, policy no.
628174379 (the "Policy"). A
copy of the Policy is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein.
5. On
March 31, 1996, at approximately 11:00 a.m., the Car was stolen from the
parking lot at 5503 Handel Court, Richmond, Virginia.
6. 5503
Handel Court, Richmond, Virginia is in the County of Chesterfield.
7. Farrow
notified the Chesterfield County Police of the theft of the Car immediately
after it occurred. Within minutes, Chesterfield
County Police officers reported to the scene, took witness statements, and
confirmed the theft.
8. Farrow
notified her agent of the theft on the afternoon of March 31, 1996. She also notified Allstate of the theft of
the Car on or about April 1, 1996, and initiated a claim under the Policy (the
"Claim").
9. Farrow
submitted an affidavit of automobile total theft to Allstate on or about April
11, 1996.
10. On
May 2, 1996, Joseph R. Young, an Allstate Staff Claims Analyst, took a recorded
statement from Farrow concerning the Claim.
11. By
letter dated May 8, 1996, Allstate requested that Farrow submit to an
examination under oath with respect to the Claim.
12. On
May 29, 1996, Farrow submitted to an examination under oath by William Tyler
Shands, Esquire, an attorney employed by Allstate ("Shands").
13. On
or about July 10, 1996, Farrow appeared at Shands' office with numerous
original documents, including credit card statements and financial records,
that had been requested by Allstate.
Farrow requested that Shands review the documents while she waited.
14. Shands
and Eric Director, Allstate's representative, both refused to examine the
documents offered by Farrow in her presence and directed Ms. Farrow to leave
the original documents for later review.
When Ms. Farrow declined to do so, she was directed to leave Shands'
office.
15. Upon
information and belief, the Car was recovered by the City of Richmond Police
Department on August 13, 1996.
16. Upon
information and belief, the Car was not identified until approximately August
26, 1996, because the thieves removed the vehicle
identification
number and attempted to scrape off all other identifying numbers.
17. On
or about September 16, 1996, Farrow submitted to a second interrogation under
oath performed by Lewis Kincer, the attorney then acting on behalf of Allstate.
18. Farrow
has provided Allstate with all documents that it has requested in connection
with its investigation of the Claim.
19. Farrow
has complied fully with all reasonable requests by Allstate made in connection
with Allstate's investigation of the Claim.
20. Allstate
has had access to all police records related to the theft of the Car.
21. During
the course of its investigation of the Claim, Allstate has discovered no facts
which justify denial of the Claim.
22. No
basis exists for Allstate to deny the Claim.
23. As
of the date of this Amended Motion for Judgment, Allstate has not paid the
Claim.
24. Allstate
has not acted in good faith in failing to pay the Claim.
25. Pursuant
to Virginia Code Section 38.2-209(A), Farrow is entitled to recover her costs
and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred in bringing this action.
26. Subsequent
to August 26, 1996, the Car was repossessed by
TMCC
and sold at auction. Upon information
and belief, the Car sold at auction for $37,600.00.
27. By
accounting statement dated March 18, 1997, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit C, TMCC notified Farrow that she owed $22,568.67 as a deficiency
amount under the Lease Agreement. The
deficiency amount includes sums required to be paid by TMCC to repair damage to
the Car resulting from the theft, which damage Allstate refused to repair under
the Policy.
28. Personal
property belonging to Farrow with a value of $10,000 was in the Car when it was
stolen. These items have not been
recovered, and Allstate has refused to pay Farrow for the loss thereof.
29. As
a direct and proximate result of Allstate's bad faith denial of Farrow's
claims, Farrow has been damaged in the amount of $45,000.00.
Count
II
30. The
allegations of paragraphs 1 through 29 of this Amended Motion for Judgment are
incorporated herein by reference.
31. The
conduct of Allstate, its employees and agents, as described above in Count I,
was willful and intentional and/or reckless and taken with the specific intent
to embarrass and humiliate Farrow, cause her to suffer severe emotional
distress, and cause damage to her personal and business reputation and credit
record.
32. During
the course of its investigation of
Farrow's claim, Allstate, its employees and agents, engaged in a pattern
of willful, intentional and/or reckless conduct calculated to cause damage and
severe emotional distress to Farrow, including, but not limited to, making
statements that Farrow was a liar, asserting that Farrow had submitted a false
claim to Allstate, and making a report to an insurance industry information
bureau suggesting that Farrow had filed a suspicious and possibly fraudulent
claim.
33. During
the course of its investigation of Farrow's claim, Allstate, its employees and
agents, have personally harassed Farrow, made unreasonable demands for
production of documents unrelated to her claim, refused to
consider
conclusive evidence in support of her claim, and falsely accused Farrow of
collusion with others in making a fraudulent claim.
34. The
conduct of Allstate, as outlined supra, was outrageous and intolerable
and directly caused Farrow to suffer severe emotional distress which is
continuing.
35. The
actions of Allstate were taken and engaged in by Allstate and its agents and
employees with actual malice towards Farrow and/or under circumstances
amounting to a willful and wanton disregard of the rights of Farrow.
WHEREFORE, plaintiff, Karen K. Farrow,
prays that this Court grant her judgment against defendant, Allstate Indemnity
Company, in the amount of FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($45,000.00), plus
interest thereon from March 31, 1996, until paid in full as compensatory
damages, plus punitive damages in the amount of THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND
DOLLARS ($350,000.00), plus her costs and reasonable attorneys' fees incurred
in bringing this action.
KAREN K. FARROW
By
Counsel
_____________________________________
Christopher M.
Malone, Esquire
Counsel for
Plaintiff
Thompson &
McMullan, P.C.
100 Shockoe Slip
(804) 649-7545
CERTIFICATE
I hereby certify that a true copy of
the foregoing Amended Motion for Judgment was mailed, postage prepaid, this 8th
day of May, 1998, to E. Lewis Kincer, Jr., Esquire, counsel of record for the defendant,
at Taylor, Hazen & Kauffman, L.C., 700 East Main Street, Suite 1104, P. O.
Box 2465, Richmond, VA 23218-2465.
________________________________________
Christopher M. Malone, Esquire