Get Your FREE Case Review Today
(888) 476-0807

District Court Denies Motion To Remand Argument Based Upon Policy Language – Waiver

Posted On Behalf of Schmidt Kramer Injury Lawyers on May 14, 2012 in General

In  Craker v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 11-0225 (W.D. Pa. May 2, 2011) the District Court denies the insured’s Motion to Remand where there is an argument that the State Farm policy was written in such a way as to waive any right to seek a remand when the insured originally filed in state court. This case arises out of an underinsured motorist claim. A breach of contract/bad faith lawsuit was filed in state court. State Farm removed the case under diversity jurisdiction to federal court.
Craker filed a Motion to Remand arguing that the State Farm policy language required suit to be filed in “state or federal” court which gave Craker the option to file in state court and then the right to remove was waived. Judge Lancaster denies the Motion to Remand and writes that the language of the policy does not waive the right to remove. He opines that the language only speaks regarding that a lawsuit must be filed and not where it will be filed. Also, there is no language in the policy which specifically indicates that the right to remove has been affirmatively waived. For a copy of the opinion contact Scott Cooper below. Scott B. CooperSchmidt Kramer PC209 State StreetHarrisburg, PA 17101(717) 232-6300 – Telephone(717) 232-6467 – Facsimilescooper@Schmidt Kramer.comwww.Schmidt Kramer.com Facebook.com/Schmidt KramerTwitter.com/TalkToALawyer