Here is the second installment of my summaries of significant recent P&C class action decisions: 

  • Seabron v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41451 (D. Colo. Mar. 27, 2012):  This is a relatively rare written opinion on several discovery issues that often arise in insurance class actions. The court resolves a dispute over production of a sample of claim files, ruling that sampling is appropriate for purposes of class discovery, and that a sample of 10% (approximately 160 files for the roughly 1600 putative class members) was appropriate.  (The insured proposed 25% and the insurer proposed 2%.)  The court also provides a detailed methodology for selecting the random sample.  There is no discussion of how the 10% figure was appropriate, it appears the court simply selected what it thought was reasonable.  The court also holds that in a UM/UIM case where bad faith claims were asserted, information regarding reserves and settlement authority was discoverable under Colorado law.  The court also addresses privacy issues involving the putative class members, concluding that medical information in claim files is discoverable, but requiring that all personal identifying information in the claim files be redacted (no doubt a time-consuming and costly effort).  Lastly, the court concludes that production of documents in .tif or .pdf format is more appropriate than native format, given that Bates numbers cannot be applied in native format and electronic redactions cannot be performed on native documents. 
  • Klonsky v. RLI Insurance Company, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47333 (D. Vt. Apr. 4, 2012):  This putative class action asserts that an insurer violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by pulling a motor vehicle history report on an insured without the driver’s consent and without a permissible purpose.  The allegation was that where a father was involved in an auto accident, the insurer also pulled a motor vehicle report for his daughter, who was insured by the policy but not involved in the accident.  This was allegedly part of a practice whereby the insurer would pull such reports for all insureds when a claim was made.  The court denied a motion to dismiss, ruling that the motor vehicle report qualified as a “consumer report” under the FCRA.  It appears the issue of whether the insurer had a proper purpose to pull the report was not raised on the motion to dismiss.  It’s unclear to me how the daughter can claim any real injury here given that her report showed a clean record.  But insurers may want to check that their procedures regarding pulling motor vehicle reports are in compliance with FCRA requirements.
Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Wystan Ackerman Wystan Ackerman

I am a partner at the law firm of Robinson+Cole in Hartford, Connecticut, USA.  My contact information is on the contact page of my blog.  I really enjoy receiving questions, comments, suggestions and even criticism from readers.  So please e-mail me if you…

I am a partner at the law firm of Robinson+Cole in Hartford, Connecticut, USA.  My contact information is on the contact page of my blog.  I really enjoy receiving questions, comments, suggestions and even criticism from readers.  So please e-mail me if you have something to say.  For those looking for my detailed law firm bio, click here.  If you want a more light-hearted and hopefully more interesting summary, read on:

People often ask about my unusual first name, Wystan.  It’s pronounced WISS-ten.  It’s not Winston.  There is no “n” in the middle.  It comes from my father’s favorite poet, W.H. (Wystan Hugh) Auden.  I’ve grown to like the fact that because my name is unusual people tend to remember it better, even if they don’t pronounce it right (and there is no need for anyone to use my last name because I’m always the only Wystan).

I grew up in Deep River, Connecticut, a small town on the west side of the Connecticut River in the south central part of the state.  I’ve always had strong interests in history, politics and baseball.  My heroes growing up were Abraham Lincoln and Wade Boggs (at that time the third baseman for the Boston Red Sox).  I think it was my early fascination with Lincoln that drove me to practice law.  I went to high school at The Williams School in New London, Connecticut, where I edited the school newspaper, played baseball, and was primarily responsible for the installation of a flag pole near the school entrance (it seemed like every other school had one but until my class raised the money and bought one at my urging, Williams had no flag pole).  As a high school senior, my interest in history and politics led me to score high enough on a test of those subjects to be chosen as one of Connecticut’s two delegates to the U.S. Senate Youth Program, which further solidified my interest in law and government.  One of my mentors at Williams was of the view that there were far too many lawyers and I should find something more useful to do, but if I really had to be a lawyer there was always room for one more.  I eventually decided to be that “one more.”  I went on to Bowdoin College, where I wrote for the Bowdoin Orient and majored in government, but took a lot of math classes because I found college math interesting and challenging.  I then went to Columbia Law School, where I was lucky enough to be selected as one of the minions who spent their time fastidiously cite-checking and Blue booking hundred-plus-page articles in the Columbia Law Review.  I also interned in the chambers of then-Judge Sonia Sotomayor when she was a relatively new judge on the Second Circuit, my only connection to someone who now has one-ninth of the last word on what constitutes the law of our land.  I graduated from Columbia in 2001, then worked at Skadden Arps in Boston before returning to Connecticut and joining Robinson+Cole, one of the largest Connecticut-based law firms.  At the end of 2008, I was elected a partner at Robinson+Cole.

I’ve worked on class actions since the start of my career.  Being in the insurance capital of Hartford, we have a national insurance litigation practice and most of the class actions I’ve defended have been brought against insurance companies. I’ve also handled some involving products liability, managed care, health care, utilities, financial services, higher education and environmental issues.

My insurance class action practice usually takes me outside of Connecticut.  I’ve had the pleasure of working on cases in various federal and state courts and collaborating with great lawyers across the country.  While class actions are an increasingly large part of my practice, I don’t do exclusively class action work.  The rest of my practice involves litigating insurance coverage cases, often at the appellate level.  That also frequently takes me outside of Connecticut.  A highlight of my career thus far was working on Standard Fire Ins. Co. v. Knowles, the U.S. Supreme Court’s first Class Action Fairness Act case.  I was Counsel of Record for Standard Fire on the cert petition, and had the pleasure of working with Ted Boutrous on the merits briefing and oral argument.

I started this blog because writing is one of my favorite things to do and I enjoy following developments in class action law, writing about them and engaging in discussion with others who have an in interest in this area.  It’s a welcome break from day-to-day practice, keeps me current, broadens my network and results in some new business.

When I’m not at work, you might find me running lines or watching a musical with my teenage daughter who hopes to be a Broadway star (or taking her to voice or dance lessons) or reading a good book.

Read more about Wystan Ackerman
Show more Show less
Related Posts
Are Defendants Required To Create Datasets to Respond to Discovery Requests in Class Actions?
January 29, 2018
Insights From FDCC Program On December 2015 Amendments To Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
March 10, 2016
2015 Amendments to Federal Rules – Impact on Class Actions
November 20, 2015