Attorneys for Florida collision repair shops that sued dozens of insurers recently responded to Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.’s request for the U.S. Middle District of Florida Court, Orlando division, to dismiss their antitrust and steering lawsuit, writing, that, “The defendants misrepresents both the contents of the complaint and quite often the holdings of authority to which it cites.” The Florida repair shops sued Hartford, State Farm and dozens of other insurers. The case has potential implications for the AGRR industry, as some automotive glass repair companies allege similar issues with third-party administrators (TPAs), which handle automotive glass claims for insurers.
“When the correct legal standards are applied, a straightforward reading of the complaint establishes there is more than sufficient facts asserted to satisfy the pleading requirements,” the attorneys claim. “The defendants’ numerous misrepresentation of fact and law do not alter this. The Motion to Dismiss is without any merit, legal or factual. The plaintiffs respectfully submit it should denied in its entirety.
“[W]hat is required from the complaint and its exhibits is to set forth sufficient facts to establish a probability of relief. That is all. The complaint more than satisfies this requirement. The plaintiffs respectfully submit that defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is without any merit whatsoever and should be denied in its entirety. Should this court determine any portion of the complaint is lacking, the plaintiffs move this court for permission to amend, the preferred remedy for such situations,” attorneys write in court documents.
The judge has not issued any decisions at press time.