Amvrosiatos v Hanover Insurance Group
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Insurance discovery in a supplementary uninsured/underinsured motorist (SUM) benefits dispute—whether the insurer’s claims adjuster must sit for a deposition.
Granted the insurer’s motion under CPLR 3103 for a protective order barring the deposition of the insurer’s representative.
The protective order; the Appellate Division denied the motion and allowed the deposition to proceed.
Under New York CPLR 3101(a) [provides for full disclosure of all matter material and necessary in the prosecution or defense of an action], discovery is broadly available. The plaintiff showed the adjuster’s testimony was relevant to the nature, timing, and adequacy of the insurer’s investigation, and the request was narrowly tailored and not palpably improper. CPLR 3103 [authorizes courts to issue protective orders regarding discovery] did not justify shielding the adjuster from deposition, especially given the insurer’s duty to investigate in good faith and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Background
Plaintiff, a pedestrian, was struck by a vehicle and held an automobile policy with a supplementary uninsured/underinsured motorist (SUM) endorsement issued by the defendant. After settling with the tortfeasor for policy limits with the insurer’s consent, plaintiff submitted a SUM claim, which the insurer denied. Plaintiff sued for breach of contract and related relief. After plaintiff’s deposition, the insurer moved for a CPLR 3103 protective order to prevent the deposition of its claims adjuster who handled the investigation.
Lower Court Decision
The Supreme Court, Queens County, granted the insurer’s CPLR 3103 motion and directed that the insurer’s representative need not appear for a deposition.
Appellate Division Reversal
Reversed on the facts and in the exercise of discretion. The court held the plaintiff made a sufficient showing that deposing the claims adjuster could yield relevant evidence regarding the insurer’s investigation and claim handling. The request was narrowly tailored and not palpably improper, so the protective order was denied and the deposition may proceed.
Legal Significance
Confirms the broad scope of discovery under CPLR 3101(a) in insurance coverage disputes and recognizes a policyholder’s right to depose a claims adjuster about the adequacy and timing of the insurer’s investigation, particularly where claims of breach and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing are at issue. Protective orders under CPLR 3103 will not issue absent a compelling showing when the deposition request is specific and relevant.
In New York SUM disputes, a plaintiff can generally depose the insurer’s claims adjuster where the request is tailored and seeks relevant information about the insurer’s investigation; CPLR 3103 protective orders will be denied without a strong justification.