top of page

News

Pennsylvania Federal Court Rejects An Insured’s Tactical Delay In Moving To Amend A Declaratory Judgment Complaint

January 28, 2022

Share to:

<p style="text-align: justify;">In <em><a href="https://www.wcmlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Giant-Eagle-Inc.-v.-Am.-Guarantee-Liab.-Ins.-Co..pdf">Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Am. Guarantee &amp; Liab. Ins. Co.</a>,</em> the Western District of Pennsylvania addressed whether the plaintiffs in an insurance declaratory judgment action would be permitted to seek leave to amend their complaint where they intentionally delayed seeking such relief for tactical reasons. Plaintiffs Giant Eagle, Inc. (“Giant Eagle”), a supermarket chain, and HBC Service Company Giant Eagle, filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a ruling that its excess insurers owed a duty to defend and indemnify Giant Eagle in four underlying opioid lawsuits. Giant Eagle was initially granted partial summary judgment after arguing that its excess carriers’ duty to defend was triggered by Giant Eagle’s payment of litigation defense costs. Several insurers moved for reconsideration, and the court vacated its partial summary judgment ruling, holding that Giant Eagle failed to show that there was no genuine issue of material fact in dispute.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Giant Eagle moved to certify an interlocutory appeal and for leave to file an amended complaint. The court denied Giant Eagle’s motion for leave to amend, concluding that the company had unduly delayed its effort to amend and that it had known the facts it was trying to add to the complaint at the time of its original filing. The court ruled that Giant Eagle’s efforts were strategic in nature and that it had delayed seeking the amendment until the outcome of its partial summary judgment motion, since the amendment would have delayed such relief.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">This case serves as a reminder that parties seeking to amend pleadings should promptly move to do so and that waiting for a tactical advantage could result in the loss of the right to make the amendment.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Thank you to Mason Bailey for his contribution to this post. Please contact <a href="mailto:agibbs@wcmlaw.com">Andrew Gibbs</a> with any questions.</p>

Contact

bottom of page