Hat tip to Roy Mura, over at Coverage Counsel, where I found this decision.
Hoffman v Unionmutual Stock Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 2008 NY Slip Op 04318 (App. Div., 2d)
Contrary to the appellant’s assertion, the Supreme Court was correct in allowing the allegations of bad faith to be incorporated in an amended complaint and in denying that branch of the appellant’s motion which to strike those portions of the amended complaint (see Bi-Economy Mkt., Inc. v Harleysville Ins. Co. of New York, 10 NY3d 187; Panasia Estates v Hudson Ins. Co., 10 NY3d 200).
It looks as if New York has its own honest to goodness bad faith cause of action. Eventually, it might work it’s way over to no-fault arena as the authors of the most recent No-Fault Wrap Up suggest and as I’ve mentioned in this blog several times. You can read my posts on the topic here, here, here, here, and here.
For a different point of view, have a look at Mr. Mura’s post on this case.
Notice the cite to Bi-Economy, the case that started it all.
In other news, for a good discussion of the doctrine of abstention as it relates to a no-fault case in federal court, please check out Mr. Mura’s post in his blog.