Mitchell Dickens and Kaitlyn Dickens v. Donna Ellison, an underinsured motorist, and Erie Insurance Company

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia grants Erie Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment and denies the plaintiffs’ partial motion for summary judgment in an underinsured-motorist coverage dispute arising from a motorcycle accident. The court holds that West Virginia law did not require Erie to make a new underinsured-motorist coverage offer when the plaintiffs added the motorcycle because the policy’s liability limits were not changed. The court also rejects the related contract, good-faith, and Unfair Trade Practices Act claims against Erie and dismisses the remaining negligence claim against Donna Ellison.

Holdings

1. West Virginia Code section 33-6-31d requires an offer of optional underinsured motorist coverage only upon the statutory triggering events identified in Burrows: the initial purchase of liability coverage, a request by the named insured for underinsured motorist coverage, or a request for different liability coverage limits. Adding a vehicle without changing the liability limits did not trigger a new offer obligation.
2. Under West Virginia law, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is not a separate cause of action from breach of contract; absent a breach of contract, the claim fails.
3. The Dickens lacked standing to assert claims under West Virginia Code section 33-11-4(9)(b), (c), (d), or (f), because those provisions do not create first-party duties for liability insurers toward their insureds.
4. The remaining UTPA claims failed because the alleged wrongdoing was confined to Erie's supposed failure to make an effective offer of underinsured motorist coverage, and the court had already determined that Erie had no such contractual or statutory obligation when the motorcycle was added.

Questions Presented

1. Whether West Virginia law required Erie to make a new offer of underinsured motorist coverage when the Dickens added the Harley Davidson as a second vehicle to the existing policy.
2. Whether Erie was entitled to summary judgment on the Dickens' claim for a declaratory judgment and any embedded breach-of-contract claim concerning underinsured motorist coverage.
3. Whether the Dickens could maintain a separate common-law claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing absent a breach of contract.
4. Whether the Dickens' extracontractual claims under the West Virginia Unfair Trade Practices Act were legally viable, including whether they had standing to assert claims under specified statutory provisions.
5. Whether the negligence claim against Donna Ellison should be dismissed where the Dickens stated that they did not intend to pursue it.

Disposition

dismissed