Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kalter v. Hartford Ins. Co.

United States District Court, E.D. New York

April 17, 2014

HAROLD KALTER and MARILYN KALTER, Plaintiffs,
v.
HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, Defendant

Page 231

For Defendant: Kenneth R. Lange, Esq., of Counsel, Goldberg Segalla LLP, Garden City, NY.

Harold Kalter, Marilyn Kalter: NO APPEARANCE.

OPINION

Page 232

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

ARTHUR D. SPATT, United States District Judge.

On January 24, 2014, the Plaintiffs Harold Kalter and Marilyn Kalter (the " Plaintiffs" ), commenced this action against the Defendant Hartford Insurance Company of the Midwest (the " Defendant" ) in Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau. The Plaintiffs asserted claims for breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and violations of New York State insurance laws in connection with the Defendant's alleged failure to provide insurance coverage under the Plaintiffs' homeowners' insurance policy for damage that the Plaintiffs claim occurred to their property on or about March 23, 2013.

On February 20, 2014, the Defendant removed the Plaintiffs' lawsuit to this Court on the ground that complete diversity of citizenship existed between the parties. One week later, on February 27, 2014, the Defendant filed a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (" Fed. R. Civ. P." ) 12(b)(6) to dismiss the Plaintiffs' breach of the duty of good faith cause of action. This motion is presently before the Court. To date, the Plaintiffs have not appeared in this action since it was removed from state court by the Defendant and have not opposed the motion.

For the reasons that follow, the Court grants the Defendant's motion. The Court also, sua sponte, dismisses the Plaintiffs' other two causes of action without prejudice.

I. BACKGROUND

Unless otherwise stated, the Court draws the following facts from the Plaintiffs' Complaint and construes them in a light most favorable to the Plaintiffs. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949-50, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009).

The Plaintiffs reside in and own a home located at 1045 Linden Street, Valley Stream, New York. The Defendant is an insurance company which is licensed to underwrite policies of insurance in the State of New York. On or before December 15, 2012, the Plaintiffs applied to the Defendant for a homeowners' policy of insurance for their Valley Stream property. About that time, the Defendant underwrote and issued a homeowners' insurance policy to the Plaintiffs (the " Policy" ). The Policy provided coverage for the dwelling, premises, property, personal property, real estate, home and/or structures located at the 1045 Linden Street address. The Policy was effective from December 15, 2012 through December 15, 2013, and the Plaintiffs paid all requisite premiums; provided all requisite information; and complied

Page 233

with all the requests and requirements of ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.