BWL Group, LLC v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA BWL GROUP, LLC, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CJ-2025-01448 Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) KELLY M. GREENOUGH Defendant. ) Case No. Judge DISTRICT COURT FILED APR 01 2025 DON NEWBIGG, Court Clerk STATE OF OKLA. TULSA COUNTY PETITION COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, BWL Group, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff"), and for its cause of action against Defendant State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, (hereinafter referred to as "Defendant" and/or "") hereby states and alleges as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, BWL Group, LLC, now, and at all times relevant hereto, owned real property in Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma. 2. Upon information and belief, Defendant State Farm Fire & Casualty Company, is a foreign corporation authorized to conduct business in the State of Oklahoma. JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITY 3. This action is brought before this Court for the reason that it may exercise jurisdiction on any basis consistent with the Constitution of the State of Oklahoma and the Constitution for the United States. 12 O.S. § 2004(F). 4. Pursuant to 12 O.S. § 133, venue is proper in this Court as the acts complained of herein occurred in Tulsa County, Oklahoma. 5. Pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2004(F), this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted herein. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. At all times material hereto, in consideration for premiums paid by Plaintiff, there was in full force and effect a policy of insurance issued by Defendant to Plaintiff, bearing the policy number 96CSJ6658 (hereinafter referred to as the "Policy"). 7. Under the terms of the Policy, Defendant agreed to insure Plaintiff against certain losses to Plaintiff's property located at 3232 E. Independence Street, Tulsa, OK 74110, (hereinafter referred to as the "Property"). 8. On or about November 2, 2024, when the above-referenced insurance policy was in full force and effect, Plaintiff's Property was damaged as a result of a storm. 9. The Policy insured the Property against the type of loss and damage suffered. 10. Plaintiffs reported the loss to Defendant; Defendant acknowledged the same and assigned claim number 36-77G2-46P to this loss (hereinafter referred to as the "Claim"). All other conditions precedent to entitle Plaintiffs to coverage and benefits under the Policy have been satisfied. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Breach of Contract) 11. Plaintiff incorporates all allegations set forth above as though fully set forth herein. 12. The Policy constitutes a valid and binding contract between Plaintiff and Defendant. 13. Plaintiff timely paid Defendant the owed Policy premiums. 14. In exchange for the Policy provisions, Defendant agreed to provide Plaintiff insurance coverage to Plaintiff's Property. 15. On or about November 2, 2024, when the above-referenced insurance policy was in full force and effect with all premiums paid, Plaintiff suffered a covered loss: storm damage. 16. Plaintiff’s Property consists of three separate apartment buildings, in which three units suddenly had leaks, and one unit had a ceiling collapse. Since the time the loss was reported, an additional ceiling has collapsed in a unit where a leak was originally noted. 17. Plaintiff timely filed a claim with Defendant and Defendant inspected the Property on or about December 4, 2024. 18. Defendant denied coverage for the damage to the Property claiming the damage was caused by wind driven rain and not damage to the Property’s roof. 19. Plaintiff has fully performed under the Policy and has demanded that Defendant perform; however, Defendant has refused to perform and has materially breached the Policy. 20. The acts and omissions of Defendant, in the handling of Plaintiff’s claim, were unreasonable and resulted in Plaintiff being paid less than what it was owed under the terms and conditions of the insurance policy issued by the Defendant. The acts and omissions of the Defendant in the investigation, evaluation, delay, and payment of Plaintiff’s claim were unreasonable and constitute a breach of contract for which contractual damages are hereby sought. 21. Plaintiff remains damaged in an amount not less than $226,871.91 for the actual damages to its Property caused by the storm. 22. Plaintiff has been forced to expend money for court costs and litigation for which it should be compensated. 23. Pursuant to 12 O.S. § 2008(A)(2) and the above facts and circumstances, Plaintiff is entitled to relief under Oklahoma statutory and common law. The total amount demanded by Plaintiff is in excess of $75,000.00. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF (Bad Faith) 24. Plaintiff incorporates all allegations set forth above as though fully set forth herein. 25. Defendant refused to acknowledge the covered loss and refused to pay Plaintiff the full amount of the covered loss owed under the Policy. 26. Defendant’s determination that Plaintiff’s Property was not entitled to payment under the Policy is a misrepresentation by Defendant of the covered losses at the Property and a gross undervaluation of the covered losses by Defendant. Plaintiff’s Property suffered storm-caused damages at the Property which were covered losses. Defendant improperly overlooked these covered losses, mischaracterized the covered losses, and/or intentionally refused to acknowledge the existence of these covered losses in its handling of the Claim. 27. Defendant has a duty to deal fairly and in good faith with its insured. 28. The acts and omissions of Defendant were in direct breach of its duty to deal fairly and in good faith with its insured, Plaintiff, and were done for Defendant’s own financial benefit. 29. Defendant’s breach of its duties towards Plaintiff includes, but is not limited to: a. Failure to conduct a full or proper investigation which resulted in Plaintiff’s claim being grossly under-adjusted when it ignored, failed to acknowledge, or mischaracterized open, notorious and obvious damage to the insured Property; b. Conducting an outcome-based investigation with a pre-determined goal to deny coverage; c. Refusing to honor Plaintiff’s Claim by knowingly misconstruing and misapplying provisions of the Policy contrary to the Policy’s express provisions and/or Oklahoma law; d. Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation and reasonable handling of Claims arising under these policies, to include Plaintiff’s Claim; e. Forcing Plaintiff, pursuant to its standard Claims practice, to retain counsel in order to secure benefits Defendant knew were payable; f. Using its unequal wealth and bargaining position to overwhelm and take advantage of Plaintiff, to affect an economic gain for Defendant by not paying amounts to Plaintiff owed by virtue of the Policy; and g. further acts as may be revealed in discovery. 30. Defendant acted with reckless disregard towards its insured, Plaintiff, in the handling and adjusting of Plaintiff’s Claim. 31. Defendant continued to act in bad faith despite receiving new information on the Claim after its initial denial. Despite evidence of a covered loss, Defendant has intentionally ignored this information and continued to deny Plaintiff's Claim. DAMAGES 32. Plaintiffs incorporate all allegations set forth above as though fully set forth herein. 33. Defendant’s actions have caused Plaintiffs to suffer mental pain, mental anguish and suffering, anxiety, embarrassment, and loss of reputation in an amount to be determined. 34. Defendant’s conduct with respect to Plaintiffs’ Claim constitutes a bad faith breach of contract, for which punitive damages should be awarded pursuant to 23 O.S. § 9.1 due to the wrongful, willful, and intentional conduct of the Defendant which was in reckless disregard of the rights of its insureds, Plaintiffs. WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff moves for a finding by the Court that Defendant State Farm Fire & Casualty Company breached its contractual duty to pay for storm damages under the valid Policy; that Plaintiff should be awarded a sum not less than $226,871.91 in actual damages; a sum in excess of $75,000.00 for consequential damages as a result of Defendant’s breach of contract; that an award of attorney fees, costs of litigation and interest is proper pursuant to 36 O.S. § 3629, 12 O.S. §§ 936, 940 & 942, and Oklahoma common law; that Defendant State Farm Fire & Casualty violated the duty of good faith and fair dealing; that Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages, fees and costs, accruing interest, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem equitable under the circumstances. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED Respectfully Submitted, Ashley Leavitt, OBA #32818 HOLBROOK LEAVITT & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 624 S. Denver Avenue, Ste 300 Tulsa, OK 74119-1075 P: (918) 373-9394 F: (918) 539-0269 E: [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff