Preview
Filing # 152252661 E-Filed 06/27/2022 02:51:22 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA
ERLENE FEDRICK,
Plaintiff,
Case No.: 35-2022-CA-000754
Vv.
PATRICK DONALD HENES and
ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY,
a Foreign Profit Corporation,
Defendants.
/
DEFENDANT, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST TO PRODUCE
Defendant, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, responds to Plaintiffs Request to Produce
as follows:
1. All insurance policies that would inure to the benefit of Plaintiff, together with any declaration
of coverage page and sworn statement of a corporate officer of Defendant attesting to the coverage
and authenticity of the policy as required by Florida Statutes.
RESPONSE: Certified copy of the Arch Insurance Company policy is attached.
2. All internal procedural memos, regarding the handling of uninsured Motorist claims, which were
in effect during the last 12 months.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
3. Defendant’s latest claims manual on processing Uninsured Motorist claims.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
4. Defendant’s most recent claims manual on processing and handling auto insurance claims in
general.
FILED: LAKE COUNTY, GARY J. COONEY, CLERK, 06/27/2022 03:05:19 PM.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
5. A copy of Defendant’s standards for the proper investigation of claims, in effect at any time
during the last 12 months.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
6. Copies of any and all leaflets, brochures, memoranda, correspondence, warnings, or policies,
disseminated by Defendant or any of Defendant’s agents, employees, or representatives, and in
effect during the last 12 months, which set forth procedures, comments, suggestions, guidelines or
criteria for handling, adjusting, investigating, or settling Uninsured Motorist claims.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
7. Correspondence or Complaint forms which Defendant or anyone adjusting claims on
Defendant’s behalf received during the last 12 months from any field operation office of The
Florida Department of Insurance concerning the handling of Uninsured Motorist claims.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant and not calculated to lead to discovery of admissible
evidence.
8. Copies of Defendant’s standards for the proper handling, investigation and recording of all
omplaints received from insured or from The Florida Department of Insurance which were in
effect at any time during the last 12 months.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant and not calculated to lead to discovery of admissible
evidence.
9. Copies of any and all leaflets, brochures, memoranda, correspondence, warnings or policies,
disseminated by Defendant or any of Defendant’s agents, employees, or representatives, and in
effect during the last 12 months, which set forth procedures, comments, suggestions, guidelines or
criteria for handling, investigating, resolving or settling complaints from insured or The Florida
Department of Insurance regarding the handling of claims.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
10. Any and all information bulletins Defendant received from The Florida Department of
Insurance between December 20, 1999 and the represent concerning the handling of uninsured
motorist claims.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
11. Any and all surveillance reports, claims history reports or other investigative reports claims
Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf prepared with regard to Plaintiff.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence. Notwithstanding said objection, the police report and
the Plaintiff’s written statement are attached.
12. Any and all surveillance films or photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s
behalf took of the Plaintiff.
RESPONSE: Attached.
13. The entire Personal Injury Protection file, including an up-to-date PIP and medical payments
payout sheet concerning the Plaintiff.
RESPONSE: Arch did not provide PIP benefits to Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s counsel is already in
possession of PIP and medical payments payout sheets from other insurers involved with this
claim.
14. Any and all statements Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took of Plaintiff or
any witnesses.
RESPONSE: Please see police report and Plaintiff’s written statement in response to Request
No. 11.
15. Any and all photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took showing the
extent of any of the vehicles involved in the accident.
RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession.
16. Any and all photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took of the scene
of the accident at any time prior to the filing of suit.
RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession.
17. Any and all estimates of repair or statements concerning the nature and extent of damage to
any of the vehicles involved in the accident.
RESPONSE: Attached.
18. Any and all writings, memorandums, notes or other materials reflecting Defendant’s
examination of any of the vehicles involved in the accident.
RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling
procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to
the discovery of admissible evidence.
19. Any and all records reflecting the towing of any vehicles involved in the accident from the
scene of the accident.
RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
WE HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing has been electronically filed and served via
Florida ePortal to: Devry R. Kelly, Esq., Dan Newlin Injury Attorneys, 7335 W. Sand Lake Road,
Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32819 at devry.kelley@newlinlaw.com; patricia.croc@newlinlaw.com;
devry.pleadings@newlinlaw.com; on June 27, 2022.
GOLDBERG SEGALLA, LLP
800 North Magnolia Ave., Suite 450
Orlando, FL 32803
Telephone: (407)458-5600
/s/ Troy Beecher
Troy Beecher, Esquire
Florida Bar No.: 37348
Email: theecher@goldbersegalla.com
sherndon@goldbergsegalla.com;
psouza@golbergsegalla.com
Preview
Filing # 152252661 E-Filed 06/27/2022 02:51:22 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LAKE COUNTY, FLORIDA ERLENE FEDRICK, Plaintiff, Case No.: 35-2022-CA-000754 Vv. PATRICK DONALD HENES and ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, a Foreign Profit Corporation, Defendants. / DEFENDANT, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY’S RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO PRODUCE Defendant, ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, responds to Plaintiffs Request to Produce as follows: 1. All insurance policies that would inure to the benefit of Plaintiff, together with any declaration of coverage page and sworn statement of a corporate officer of Defendant attesting to the coverage and authenticity of the policy as required by Florida Statutes. RESPONSE: Certified copy of the Arch Insurance Company policy is attached. 2. All internal procedural memos, regarding the handling of uninsured Motorist claims, which were in effect during the last 12 months. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 3. Defendant’s latest claims manual on processing Uninsured Motorist claims. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 4. Defendant’s most recent claims manual on processing and handling auto insurance claims in general. FILED: LAKE COUNTY, GARY J. COONEY, CLERK, 06/27/2022 03:05:19 PM. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 5. A copy of Defendant’s standards for the proper investigation of claims, in effect at any time during the last 12 months. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 6. Copies of any and all leaflets, brochures, memoranda, correspondence, warnings, or policies, disseminated by Defendant or any of Defendant’s agents, employees, or representatives, and in effect during the last 12 months, which set forth procedures, comments, suggestions, guidelines or criteria for handling, adjusting, investigating, or settling Uninsured Motorist claims. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 7. Correspondence or Complaint forms which Defendant or anyone adjusting claims on Defendant’s behalf received during the last 12 months from any field operation office of The Florida Department of Insurance concerning the handling of Uninsured Motorist claims. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant and not calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. 8. Copies of Defendant’s standards for the proper handling, investigation and recording of all omplaints received from insured or from The Florida Department of Insurance which were in effect at any time during the last 12 months. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant and not calculated to lead to discovery of admissible evidence. 9. Copies of any and all leaflets, brochures, memoranda, correspondence, warnings or policies, disseminated by Defendant or any of Defendant’s agents, employees, or representatives, and in effect during the last 12 months, which set forth procedures, comments, suggestions, guidelines or criteria for handling, investigating, resolving or settling complaints from insured or The Florida Department of Insurance regarding the handling of claims. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 10. Any and all information bulletins Defendant received from The Florida Department of Insurance between December 20, 1999 and the represent concerning the handling of uninsured motorist claims. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 11. Any and all surveillance reports, claims history reports or other investigative reports claims Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf prepared with regard to Plaintiff. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Notwithstanding said objection, the police report and the Plaintiff’s written statement are attached. 12. Any and all surveillance films or photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took of the Plaintiff. RESPONSE: Attached. 13. The entire Personal Injury Protection file, including an up-to-date PIP and medical payments payout sheet concerning the Plaintiff. RESPONSE: Arch did not provide PIP benefits to Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s counsel is already in possession of PIP and medical payments payout sheets from other insurers involved with this claim. 14. Any and all statements Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took of Plaintiff or any witnesses. RESPONSE: Please see police report and Plaintiff’s written statement in response to Request No. 11. 15. Any and all photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took showing the extent of any of the vehicles involved in the accident. RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession. 16. Any and all photographs Defendant or anyone acting on Defendant’s behalf took of the scene of the accident at any time prior to the filing of suit. RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession. 17. Any and all estimates of repair or statements concerning the nature and extent of damage to any of the vehicles involved in the accident. RESPONSE: Attached. 18. Any and all writings, memorandums, notes or other materials reflecting Defendant’s examination of any of the vehicles involved in the accident. RESPONSE: Objection, irrelevant. An insurer’s claim file, and any claims handling procedures or guidelines, are irrelevant in a coverage dispute and not calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 19. Any and all records reflecting the towing of any vehicles involved in the accident from the scene of the accident. RESPONSE: None in Arch’s possession. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE WE HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing has been electronically filed and served via Florida ePortal to: Devry R. Kelly, Esq., Dan Newlin Injury Attorneys, 7335 W. Sand Lake Road, Suite 300, Orlando, FL 32819 at devry.kelley@newlinlaw.com; patricia.croc@newlinlaw.com; devry.pleadings@newlinlaw.com; on June 27, 2022. GOLDBERG SEGALLA, LLP 800 North Magnolia Ave., Suite 450 Orlando, FL 32803 Telephone: (407)458-5600 /s/ Troy Beecher Troy Beecher, Esquire Florida Bar No.: 37348 Email: theecher@goldbersegalla.com sherndon@goldbergsegalla.com; psouza@golbergsegalla.com