Tracy Turner v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TULSA COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA TRACY TURNER, an Individual, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Corporation, TARA STALLER, an Individual, and, DOORDASH, INC., a Foreign Corporation, Defendant. Case No. Caroline Wall ATTORNEY LIEN CLAIMED PETITION COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Tracy Turner, by and through her attorneys of record, SMOLEN | LAW, PLLC, and for her cause of action against Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Tara Staller, and DoorDash, Inc., sets forth and states as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Plaintiff Tracy Turner is a citizen of the State of Oklahoma and a resident of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. 2. Defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ("State Farm") is a foreign corporation, licensed to conduct business as an insurer in Oklahoma, and regularly conducts business in Tulsa County, Oklahoma. 3. Defendant Tara Staller is a citizen of the State of Oklahoma. 4. Defendant DoorDash, Inc. ("DoorDash") is a foreign corporation that regularly conducts business in Tulsa County, Oklahoma. 5. The acts, occurrences and omissions complained of herein occurred in Tulsa County, Oklahoma. 6. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and venue is proper in this Court. FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS 7. Paragraphs 1-6 are incorporated herein by reference. 8. On or about May 24, 2024, Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident ("Accident"). 9. Defendant Staller caused the Accident. Specifically, Defendant Staller was traveling southbound on South Olympia Avenue and turned left directly in front of Plaintiff, who was traveling northbound on South Olympia Avenue. 10. Plaintiff had the right of way at the time of the Accident, and bore no fault for the Accident. 11. As a result of the Accident, Plaintiff suffered significant bodily injuries and incurred considerable medical expenses. 12. At the time of the Accident, Defendant Staller was operating her vehicle within the course, scope, and authority of her employment and/or agency with DoorDash. 13. At the time of the Accident, Plaintiff was covered under a policy of insurance with uninsured/underinsured motorist ("UM") coverage underwritten and issued by State Farm. 14. This is a situation wherein UM coverage applies, and Plaintiff was entitled to benefits under the policy issued by Defendant State Farm. 15. Plaintiff submitted her demand for performance under the State Farm policy. 16. State Farm had all the necessary information to determine that Plaintiff had UM coverage. 17. However, State Farm unreasonably denied UM coverage for Plaintiff. 18. To date, Defendant State Farm has not tendered benefits plainly owed to Plaintiff under the applicable policy of insurance. 19. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff relied on Defendant State Farm to properly handle her claim and make coverage determinations and payment pursuant to the applicable policy of insurance. 20. Plaintiff made all necessary and required demands on Defendant State Farm for payment of the benefits owed under the applicable policy of insurance and otherwise satisfied all conditions precedent for payment under the policy. 21. Defendant State Farm has unreasonably failed and refused to pay Plaintiff the appropriate benefits due under the applicable policy of insurance. 22. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered the loss of insurance policy benefits, mental and emotional distress, anxiety, embarrassment, and financial hardship. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I: BREACH OF CONTRACT/BREACH OF THE IMPLIED DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING 23. Paragraphs 1-22 are incorporated herein by reference. 24. Defendant State Farm owed Plaintiff a duty to act in good faith and deal fairly with her in the handling of her claim for coverage and benefits under the applicable insurance policy. 25. At the time of the Accident, Plaintiff was insured and entitled to coverage and benefits under the applicable insurance policy. 26. Plaintiff requested that Defendant State Farm afford coverage and benefits under said insurance policy, and Defendant has failed and refused to do so. 27. Plaintiff has performed all conditions precedent under the applicable policy of insurance and fully cooperated with Defendant Farm’s reasonable requests for information. 28. Defendant State Farm has breached its obligations under the policy, and Plaintiff has suffered damages. 29. In its handling of Plaintiff’s claim for benefits under the policy, and as a matter of routine practice in handling similar claims, Defendant State Farm breached its affirmative duty to deal fairly and in good faith towards Plaintiff in the following respects: a. Failing to pay Plaintiff the benefits she was entitled to receive under the applicable policy when Defendant knew Plaintiff was entitled to those benefits; b. Withholding payment of benefits due and owing under the applicable policy when Defendant knew that Plaintiff’s claim for such benefits was valid; c. Unreasonably delaying payment of benefits under the applicable policy without a reasonable basis; d. Refusing to pay Plaintiff’s claim for benefits under the applicable policy for reasons contrary to the express provisions of the law; e. Denying UM coverage under the applicable policy for reasons contrary to the express provisions of the law; f. Intentionally and recklessly misapplying provisions of the applicable policy and looking for ways to avoid paying some or all of Plaintiff’s claim for benefits under the policy; g. Failing to properly investigate Plaintiff’s claim for benefits under the applicable policy; h. Failing to properly evaluate Plaintiff’s claim for benefits under the applicable policy; i. Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation, evaluation, and handling of claims arising under its policy, including Plaintiff's claim; j. Unreasonably delaying Plaintiff's claim for benefits and putting the burden of investigation onto Plaintiff and her attorneys; and k. Failing to attempt to act in good faith to effectuate a prompt and fair settlement of Plaintiff's claim. 30. As a result of Defendant State Farm's wrongful conduct set forth herein, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages, including the loss of insurance policy benefits, mental and emotional distress, anxiety, embarrassment, lost wages, and financial hardship, in amounts that exceed Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00). COUNT II: NEGLIGENCE 31. Paragraphs 1-30 are incorporated herein by reference. 32. Defendant Staller owed a duty to Plaintiff to operate her vehicle in a safe and reasonable manner. 33. Defendant Staller breached the duty owed to Plaintiff by turning her vehicle directly in front of Plaintiff's, causing the Accident. 34. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Staller's breach, Plaintiff has suffered bodily injury and incurred significant medical expenses. 35. Defendant Staller was an agent and/or employee of Defendant DoorDash at the time of the Accident, and was operating within the course, scope, and authority of her agency and/or employment with Defendant DoorDash when the Accident occurred. 36. DoorDash is liable for Defendant Staller's negligence under a theory of vicarious liability and/or respondeat superior. 37. As a result of Defendants Staller and DoorDash’s wrongful conduct set forth herein, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages, including bodily injury, mental and emotional distress, lost wages, and financial hardship, in amounts that exceed Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00). COUNT III: NEGLIGENCE HIRING, TRAINING, SUPERVISION, AND RETENTION 38. Paragraphs 1-37 are incorporated herein by reference. 39. Defendant DoorDash owed a duty to Plaintiff to hire, train, supervise, and retain its agents and/or employees, including Defendant Staller. 40. Upon information and belief that will be confirmed in discovery, Defendant DoorDash knew or should have known that at the time of the Accident, Defendant Staller had a propensity to cause the very Accident that occurred. 41. Upon information and belief that will be confirmed in discovery, Defendant Staller’s negligent conduct was reasonably foreseeable to Defendant DoorDash. 42. Upon information and belief that will be confirmed in discovery, despite Defendant Staller’s propensity to operate her vehicle in an unsafe manner, Defendant DoorDash hired and retained Defendant Staller. 43. Upon information and belief that will be confirmed in discovery, Defendant DoorDash failed to provide adequate and/or reasonable training or supervision to Defendant Staller. 44. Defendant DoorDash breached the duty owed to Plaintiff. 45. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant DoorDash’s breach, Plaintiff has suffered bodily injury and incurred significant medical expenses. 46. As a result of Defendants DoorDash’s wrongful conduct set forth herein, Plaintiff has suffered actual damages, including bodily injury, mental and emotional distress, lost wages, and financial hardship, in amounts that exceed Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00). PUNITIVE DAMAGES 47. The intentional, wanton, and reckless conduct of Defendants in disregard of Plaintiff and others was conducted with full knowledge, in that Defendants knew, or should have known, of the severe adverse consequences of their actions upon Plaintiff and others. 48. Such actions were not only detrimental to Plaintiff, but to the public in general. 49. Defendants acted intentionally, maliciously, and in reckless disregard of the rights of Plaintiff. As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to recover punitive damages against Defendants. WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Plaintiff prays that the Court grant her the relief sought, including, but not limited to, actual damages in excess of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), punitive damages in excess of Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), all applicable pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and all other relief deemed appropriate by this Court. Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues and claims. Respectfully submitted, SMOLEN | LAW, PLLC ______________________________ Donald E. Smolen, II, OBA #19944 Christopher D. Mochulsky, OBA #36345 611 S. Detroit Ave. Tulsa, OK 74120 P: (918) 777-4LAW (4529) F: (918) 890-4529 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff