Where UM/UIM claim is severed from bad faith claim, discovery should remain separate.

The plaintiff’s claims for UIM benefits and bad faith were severed, and the latter held in abeyance, but the motion judge compelled contemporaneous discovery and rejected the insurer’s claim that this discovery would be prejudicial. This court determined that allowing simultaneous discovery was problematic because it may: (a) result in a potential waste of time and money if the insurer prevails in the underlying UM or UIM matter; (b) prejudice the insurer’s UM or UIM defense strategy by the disclosure of potentially privileged materials; and (c) encourage the plaintiffs to file bad faith claims with every breach of contract claim to access the insurer’s investigative files. The court held that bad faith discovery should not begin until the UM or UIM matter is resolved in the insured’s favor.

Case Law Alert, 1^st Quarter 2014