Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company

W.D. Arkansas

Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company

DecidedSeptember 17, 2021

Docket2:21-cv-02058

StatusUnknown

This text of Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company (Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Arkansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company, (W.D. Ark. 2021).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION

TRUONG SON MARKET, INC. and 4 STAR GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC. PLAINTIFFS

v. No. 2:21-CV-02058

STATE AUTO PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY DEFENDANT

OPINION AND ORDER

Defendant filed a motion (Doc. 23) to dismiss and brief (Doc. 24) in support. Plaintiffs filed a response (Doc. 26) in opposition. The motion will be denied. The response clarifies that Plaintiff 4 Star General Contracting, Inc. is the only party raising a breach of contract against Defendant, and that each Plaintiff is also raising the tort of bad faith based on separate alleged misconduct by Defendant before and after assignment of the insurance claim. The tort of bad faith in Arkansas is a “separate tort action” that arises out of “affirmative misconduct by the insurance company, without a good faith defense.” Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. v. Broadway Arms Corp., 664 S.W.2d 463, 465 (Ark. 1984). “Arkansas law is clear that a cause of action accrues the moment the right to commence an action comes into existence.” Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nash, 184 S.W.3d 425, 428 (Ark. 2004). If Defendant committed the tort of bad faith against Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. before assignment of the insurance claim to Plaintiff 4 Star General Contracting, Inc., and if the former did not assign its bad faith claim to the latter (all fact-based issues more appropriately considered at the summary judgment stage, or at trial), then the accrued claim belongs to Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. If Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. “actually possess[es], under the substantive law, the right sought to be enforced,” then that plaintiff is the real party in interest under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17. United Healthcare Corp. v. Am. Trade Ins. Co., Ltd., 88 F.3d 563, 569 (8th Cir. 1996). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. 23) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of September, 2021. /s/P. K. Holmes,

P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION

TRUONG SON MARKET, INC. and 4 STAR GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC. PLAINTIFFS

v. No. 2:21-CV-02058

STATE AUTO PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY DEFENDANT

OPINION AND ORDER

Defendant filed a motion (Doc. 23) to dismiss and brief (Doc. 24) in support. Plaintiffs filed a response (Doc. 26) in opposition. The motion will be denied. The response clarifies that Plaintiff 4 Star General Contracting, Inc. is the only party raising a breach of contract against Defendant, and that each Plaintiff is also raising the tort of bad faith based on separate alleged misconduct by Defendant before and after assignment of the insurance claim. The tort of bad faith in Arkansas is a “separate tort action” that arises out of “affirmative misconduct by the insurance company, without a good faith defense.” Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co. v. Broadway Arms Corp., 664 S.W.2d 463, 465 (Ark. 1984). “Arkansas law is clear that a cause of action accrues the moment the right to commence an action comes into existence.” Shelter Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nash, 184 S.W.3d 425, 428 (Ark. 2004). If Defendant committed the tort of bad faith against Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. before assignment of the insurance claim to Plaintiff 4 Star General Contracting, Inc., and if the former did not assign its bad faith claim to the latter (all fact-based issues more appropriately considered at the summary judgment stage, or at trial), then the accrued claim belongs to Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. If Plaintiff Truong Son Market, Inc. “actually possess[es], under the substantive law, the right sought to be enforced,” then that plaintiff is the real party in interest under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17. United Healthcare Corp. v. Am. Trade Ins. Co., Ltd., 88 F.3d 563, 569 (8th Cir. 1996). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. 23) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of September, 2021. /s/P. K. Holmes,

P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Truong Son Market, Inc. v. State Auto Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/truong-son-market-inc-v-state-auto-property-and-casualty-insurance-arwd-2021.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack