In
Ex parte The Cincinnati Insurance Co., [Ms. 1081699, June 11, 2010] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2010), the Alabama Supreme
Court granted a writ of mandamus filed by the Cincinnati Insurance Company
and instructed the trial court to dismiss the plaintiff's complaint
because the filed-rate doctrine requires dismissal and, alternatively,
the plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies. In the underlying
action, Plaintiff Ray Peacock filed a complaint on behalf of himself and
a putative class, alleging claims of breach of contract, fraudulent misrepresentation,
fraudulent suppression, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff alleged that,
by charging premiums for UM coverage on more than three vehicles under
a single policy, and because the maximum number of vehicles that can be
stacked is three, the Cincinnati Insurance Company "overcharges for
UM coverage it knows it will never have to provide." The Court held
that outside the limited judicial review provided by the Insurance Code,
a court cannot review claims of unreasonable rates previously approved
by the Insurance commissioner in actions where the commissioner is not
a party. Because the Plaintiff did not seek relief from the Department
of Insurance prior to filing claims in court, dismissal of the action
was warranted.
RELATED DOCUMENTS