Baker v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION LISA BAKER PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL NO. 21-5226 - CDC STATE FARM FIRE AND CASULATY COMPANY DEFENDANT ORDER On this 1st day of April 2022, came on for consideration Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 12) Count II of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (First Party Bad Faith) and Plaintiff’s Response (ECF No. 14), and the Court, having reviewed the parties’ pleadings and applicable law, finds that Defendant’s Motion is sound. Viewed as true for purposes of the Court’s F.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) analysis, allegations contained in Paragraphs 16-21 of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint assert a breach of contract claim but not a claim of first party bad faith under Arkansas law. See Bethel Baptist Church v. Church Mut. Ins. Co., 54 Ark. App. 262, 265 (1996) (citing Williams v. Joyner–Cranford–Burke Constr. Co., 285 Ark. 134, 139 (1985)) (Arkansas law requires facts supportive of “affirmative misconduct by the insurance company, in bad faith, and malicious or oppressive attempt to avoid liability under the policy.”); see also Unum Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Edwards, 362 Ark. 624, 628 (2005); F.R.Civ.P. 8. With respect to bad faith, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint does not rise above labels and conclusions, and thus, is not specific enough to raise a right to relief which is plausible and beyond speculation. See Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 12) should be and it hereby is GRANTED, and Count II of Plaintiff?s Amended Complaint, along with Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages, DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The remainder of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint remains for trial. IT IS SO ORDERED this 1“ day of April 2022. CHRISTY COMSTOCK UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE