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.

Albert v. GEICO

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

October 10, 2017

Kallys Albert, Sr., Plaintiff,
v.
GEICO, GEICO General Insurance Company, and John Doe, Defendants.

          Kallys Albert, Sr., pro se Plaintiff.

          Michael C. Lindberg, Esq., and Peter M. Lindberg, Esq., Cousineau, VanBergen, McNee & Malone, P.A., counsel for Defendant GEICO General Insurance Company.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          BECKY R. THORSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant GEICO General Insurance Company's (“GEICO's”) motion to dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and (6); GEICO argues the Complaint does not provide a basis for federal jurisdiction and does not state a claim for relief. (Doc. No. 5.) Also before the Court is Plaintiff's “Motions for a Declaratory Judgment; Temporary Restraining Order, and a Preliminary Injunction.” (Doc. No. 16.) Both motions were fully briefed and a hearing was held on the matters on September 13, 2017. (Doc. No. 36.) For the reasons stated below, this Court recommends that Defendant's motion to dismiss be granted for lack of jurisdiction and Plaintiff's motions be denied.

         BACKGROUND

         In May 2017, Plaintiff Kallys Albert, Sr. filed a Complaint against GEICO. (Doc. No. 1., Compl.) The dispute stems from a GEICO automobile insurance policy issued to Plaintiff in 2016. (Id. at ¶¶ 7-8.) The best the Court can tell, Plaintiff had at least six vehicles and four listed drivers on the policy at various times throughout the policy period. (See generally Compl.) Plaintiff appears to claim that GEICO did not add or remove vehicles to his policy when asked to do so, impermissibly added vehicles to his policy without consent, and miscalculated his premiums as a result. (Id.) Plaintiff alleges he has been overcharged, that GEICO has failed to return or credit him with “unearned premiums, ” and that GEICO has failed to pay certain claims that he submitted. (Id.) Plaintiff asserts the following eight causes of action in his Complaint: (1) Breach of Contract; (2) Negligent Misrepresentation; (3) Declaratory Judgment; (4) Specific Performance; (5) Unjust Enrichment; (6) Violation of the Fair Credit Billing Act; (7) Bad Faith; and (8) Loss of Consortium/Contractual Interference with Third Party Relationship. (Id.)

         In his “Prayer for Relief, ” Plaintiff requests the following:

A. A Declaration and/or Judgment by this Court that the subject policy provides full and complete automobile insurance coverage for the damages and subsequent claims hitherto made by Plaintiff against the insurer.
B. A Declaration and/or Judgment that GEICO violated the Fair Credit Billing Act; any Code of Federal Regulations interpreting same, and federal common law in insurance claims and adjusting, claims handling and payment, refunds and/or credit of over-payments, and unearned premiums, imposition of unconsented vehicle into the insurance policy, and threat to cancel insurance policy for Plaintiff's exercise of his right to object to, and dispute arbitrary billings by GEICO under the automobile policy of insurance and specifically declare that Plaintiff did not consent to, add, or agree to insure the Pt Cruiser for $441.80.
C. Federal common law bad faith damages against GEICO General Insurance Company including attorney's fees, court costs and any other damages incurred by plaintiff as a result of the bad faith of GEICO;
D. Court costs, expenses, and judicial interest; and
E. A temporary injunctive relief, enjoining GEICO General Insurance Company from threatening, carrying out the threat and/or cancelling Plaintiff's automobile insurance policy pending and until the resolution of this case[;]
F. Any and all other equitable relief deemed appropriate by ...

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.