Previously denying consolidation of all COVID-19 business interruption claims [post here], the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation allowed consolidation of one group of cases against Society Insurance Company while denying consolidation of four other groups of cases. In re Soc'y Ins. Co. COVID-19 Bus. Interruption Protection Ins. Litigation, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 183678 (J.P.M.L. Oct. 2, 2020).
Claims against Society encompassed 34 actions filed in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Tennessee. The court found that centralization of the Society actions would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and further the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. The actions shared common factual allegations that Society wrongfully denied policy holders' claims for business interruption coverage. Plaintiffs contended that Society preemptively decided to deny their claims.
The policies appeared to use standard forms drafted by the ISO and would involve the interpretation of common policy language. The actions would require an assessment of whether COVID-19 caused any direct physical loss of or to property, and whether any of Society's policy exclusions applied to preclude claims. To the extent discovery was necessary regarding the drafting and interpretation of the policies, that discovery would be common to all actions.
The panel recognized that many plaintiffs were on the brink of bankruptcy as a result of business lost due to the COVID-19 pandemic and government closure orders. Centralization presented the most efficient means of advancing these actions toward resolution.
In other orders, the Panel concluded that consolidation would not be the most efficient method for suits against The Hartford, Travelers, Cincinnati Insurance Company and Lloyd's of London.
