In re State Farm Lloyds Hurricane Ike Litigation

State Farm Lloyds Hurricane Ike Litigation · Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel · May 21, 2012 · No. MDL No. 12-0156

Summary

The Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel grants State Farm Lloyds’ motion to transfer 266 Hurricane Ike insurance lawsuits pending in sixteen counties to a single MDL pretrial court. The panel concludes that the cases are related because they arise from the same hurricane and involve common issues concerning State Farm’s claims-handling practices. It explains that transfer will promote convenience, efficiency, consistent rulings, coordinated discovery, and intelligent allocation of judicial resources.

Court
Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel
Writing for the Court
David Peeples, Presiding Judge; Presiding Judge David Peeples; Chief Justice Stone; Chief Justice McClure; Justice Brown
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
May 21, 2012
Docket number
MDL No. 12-0156
Procedural posture
State Farm Lloyds moved to transfer 266 related insurance lawsuits pending in sixteen Texas counties to a single multidistrict litigation pretrial court under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13. The Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel considered the motion after previously granting the transfer and assigning a pretrial judge by separate orders.
Standard of review
The panel applied the transfer standards under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13, asking whether the cases were related and whether transfer would promote convenience, efficiency, and just handling by eliminating duplicative discovery, minimizing conflicting demands on witnesses, preventing inconsistent decisions, reducing unnecessary travel, and conserving judicial resources.
Precedential value
Published opinion of the Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel
Parties
State Farm Lloyds v. Plaintiffs in the 266 Hurricane Ike insurance lawsuits
Disposition
other

Topics

commercial litigationinsurancediscovery disputecivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedureinsurancecommercial litigation

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the 266 Hurricane Ike insurance lawsuits were related cases involving common questions of fact under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13.
  2. Whether transfer of the cases to a single MDL pretrial court would promote the convenience of the parties and witnesses and the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
  3. Whether transfer required proof of existing inconsistent rulings, repetitive discovery, witness inconvenience, or other present dysfunction.
  4. Whether existing county-wide pretrial courts, concerns about delay or uniform discovery, or pending mandamus proceedings made MDL transfer unnecessary.

Holdings

  1. The 266 lawsuits were related because they arose from the same hurricane and involved common questions concerning State Farm's claims-handling practices and related discovery.
  2. A moving party need not prove that inconsistent rulings, repetitive discovery, witness inconvenience, or other dysfunction has already occurred before the panel may transfer related cases under Rule 13.
  3. Transfer of the 266 lawsuits to one MDL pretrial court would promote convenience, efficiency, and just handling by coordinating discovery, preventing inconsistent rulings, reducing conflicting demands, and conserving judicial resources.
  4. Transfer does not require one-size-fits-all discovery or eliminate case-specific issues; the MDL pretrial judge must coordinate common issues while giving individual consideration to unique issues in each lawsuit.

Key quotations

Rule 13 seeks to prevent the occurrence of problems in the future and is not limited to correcting ongoing problems from the past
The pretrial judge will, of course, deal with general discovery issues common to the majority of cases.

Factual background

The 266 lawsuits arose from property damage allegedly caused by Hurricane Ike in 2008. The plaintiffs alleged that State Farm and its adjusters mishandled, undervalued, or improperly investigated claims and engaged in unfair settlement practices, including a purported general business practice affecting policyholders. The cases involved both case-specific discovery and broad discovery into State Farm's property-insurance claims-handling practices over periods extending several years.

Procedural history

The lawsuits arose from Hurricane Ike damage in 2008 and included overlapping allegations concerning State Farm's claims-handling practices and requests for common discovery. The panel had previously granted State Farm's motion to transfer and assigned a pretrial judge; this opinion explains the reasons for that ruling.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…