In a recent post, we discussed Dickerson v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 26504 (5th Cir. Dec. 22, 2008) where the Fifth Circuit determined damages for mental anguish were properly granted based on the insurer's bad faith delay in paying a claim after Hurricane Katrina. Dickerson controlled a subsequent decision by the Federal District Court in Louisiana when State Farm's motion for summary judgment as to plaintiffs' claims for mental anguish was denied. See Fasone v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3027 (E.D. La. Jan. 9, 2009).
In Fasone, plaintiffs sought coverage under their State Farm policy for damages sustained to their home during Hurricane Katrina. Although coverage for their dwelling was $166,300, State Farm paid only $22,491.17. The District Court noted in Dickerson, the Fifth Circuit had decided as a matter of law that plaintiffs may seek damages for mental anguish based on an insurer's bad faith failure to timely adjust a claim. State Farm also challenged the sufficiency of plaintiffs' evidence on mental anguish because no expert testimony was offered. Again relying on Dickerson, the District Court determined the plaintiff's affidavit describing his mental state and linking specific feelings, such as frustration, anger, and humiliation, to specific acts by State Farm was sufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact.
