Bates v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance

Good Law
765 F. Supp. 2d 1218·2011 WL 1745179·2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50628
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaApril 11, 2011Case CV 10-09818 DDP (JCGx)California1,583 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pregerson, J.

Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Defendant”) moves this court to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Third, Fourth, and Fifth Cause of Action from Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Defendant also moves this court to strike various portions of Plaintiffs’ FAC. Having read the parties’ papers, considered the arguments therein, and heard oral argument, the court GRANTS Defendant’s motion to dismiss and DENIES Defendant’s motion to strike.

I. Background

In July 2004, Roberta Bates, the mother of Melinda Bates, Arthur Bates, and Vanessa Van Muysen (collectively “Plaintiffs”) purchased an individual insurance policy from Defendant. (Compl. ¶ 7.) Bates designated her three children, i.e. Plaintiffs, as beneficiaries of her Accidental Death and Dismemberment policy. (Id. ¶ 9.) Bates paid monthly premiums on her policy. (Id. ¶ 10.) In July 2009, Bates tripped and injured herself. (Id. ¶ 11.) The injury ultimately led to her death on October 29, 2009. (Id. ¶ 13.)

Plaintiffs submitted a claim to Defendant, and in December, Plaintiffs were notified that Defendant had denied their claim for benefits under Bates’ insurance policy. (Id. ¶ 16.) Plaintiffs then filed suit in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.