MAIN STREET TITLE & SETTLEMENT SERVICES, LLC v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY Et Al Complaint

Case 2:10-cv-06410-JLL -CCC Document 1-1 Filed 12/10/10 Page 2 of 53 PageID: 5
SUPERIOR COURT ·tIIlSEN COUNTY

F I LED
NOV 0.,3' 2010

The Law Offices of Robert G. Ricco, Esq.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
·811 Westwood Avenue
River Vale, NEW JERSEY 07675
Telephone: (201) 497-6524
Attorneys for Plaintiffs.
~&
'Pf CLERK
....
MAIN STREET TITLE & SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
SETTLEMENT SERVICES, LLC, . EQUITY/ DIVISION: BERGEN
CO~_I056~-'O
Plaintiffs,
-against- Docket No: BER" --------/10
ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE CIVIL ACTION

COMPANY, ACE USA, John and Jane
Does 1-100; and XYZ CORPS. 1-100, VERIFIED COMPLAINT .
XYZ LLCS. 1-100,
Defendants
. ,
Plaintiff MAIN STREET TITLE & SETTLEMENT SERVICES LLC, doing business at 190
Main street, Hackensack, NJ, by way of Verified Complaint says:
i.' On .ot about December 11, 2008, The Main Street Title & Settlement Services, LLC.,
. 0~remafter ''M;ain Street", or Plaintiff: and .similarly all references in plural shall apply to same)
:enteied: mto, a co'iitract o·r.~~e wit~: ACE American Insurance Company and ACE l1SA,
·(hereinafter cOllectively referred t~' as "ACE") for errors and omissions coveragci (See insurance
, .
. ' :bmder Attached hereto as EXlilbit A).
2. . The iriSurance was to provide retroactive coverage for all prior years of Main Street
. .
operationS, and slated to begin on January 6, 2009. (See Contract oflnsuIance dated attached to
. the Complaint hereto as Exhibit "B").

I '
"
1
3. In June of2009, Main Street was served with a lawsuit by Loir Ann Palumbo, namely
Palumbo v. Main Street, Index No., Pas-L-248S ..09, the allegations of which are discussed in the
supporting memorandum of law.
4. Main Street never had knowledge of this claim brought by Lori Ann Palumbo until it was
served in the summer of2009, and filed by Palumbo in court on June 5, 2009.
5. Main Street did not obtain knowledge or information about this claim prior to the
inception date of the policy.
6. During the litigation initiated by Lori Ann Palumbo, her attorneys produced a letter dated
December 11,2008 purportedly notifying Main Street of the claim, but Main Street never
received that letter.
7. The letter produced was not certified, and no certified receipt was produced.
8. ' Main Street was in the business of moving to a new location, at 190 Main Street, and
aJteady bad changed its postal address by notification to the post office.
9~ It no longer received mail at the old address, 210 River Street, because the post office
tefused to deliver there once the change of address was filed.
10, Maul Str~ 'is unsure what the post office did with mail addressed to 210 'Main Str~et, ,
but Some mail '~Ved week~s ,later adVising Main' Street t~ notify addressors to send to the new
address. Main Street nt:;ver received such a notice or the purpO~ed letter dated December 11.
: '
2008,
11. 1n any event, the'purported December 11, 2008 letter was never received.
, ii', Based on this ietter which ACE incorrectly believed Main Street bad received, it
:, deCided. ~o'd~litie
'.
and withdraw,
" . ,.
coverage arid cease its qefe~e ofMairi
. '..
Street durin8 ijtigatiQD
. "
. "
on the eve of triaL
2
13. Main Street was forced to pay its own counsel, and defend itself and remains prejudiced
by this outrageous conduct on the part of ACE, which smacks of bad faith.
14. The nature of what Lori Ann Palumbo alleged, namely that Main Street had wired
money without authority to her joint marital bank account, is a rank lie. Not only did Main
Street have written authority from her, but it was confirmed by telephone by a Main Street
employee.
15., Furthermore, Lori Ann Palumbo asserted that her husband stole the money, but never
proved it was stolen. Therefore, her claim was frivolous at best, and fraudulent at worst.
16. Main Street never had an inkling that its wire transfer was improper, as the lawsuit came
three years later, and Lori Ann Palumbo never made a peep over-where the money was wired in
, all that time.
17. Furthermore, Ms. Palumbo was. a well educated chiropractor, with her own business.
Yet she allowed her husband to do all of her finances, as she 'testified in her deposition taken in
the uriderlying case •
•* : •. '
AS AND FOR A' FI:RsT COUNT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND
SPECIFIc PERFORMANcE
. .
'18. Plaintiff hereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every of the foregoing
allegations contained· in paragraphs 1 through 17 as if set forth verbatim here.
19. Upon infonnation and belie(' ACE breached their agreements with Main Street by
denying coverage an9, withdrawing its legal defense: of Main Stree~ in the litigation brougl;tt .
.a~t it: b; ~ri Ann p~ on th~ e~ of ~ ·~sed· upon a ~~idOO ·n~tion that Main .
Street had knowledge of a pre-existing claim.
3
20. Upon information and belie£: ACE breached their agreements with Main Street by
failing to fully investigate whether Main Street had the requisite knowledge of a claim that
ultimately was brou~ht by Palumbo.
21. Upon information and belief, ACE breached their agreements with Main Street by
narrowly interpreting .the exclusion based upon pre-existing knowledge of a claim in
contravention of what is nonnally expected by an insured in New Jersey, withdrawing its defense
on the eve of trial.
22. Main Street has been damaged by the actions of the defendants in an amount to be
determ.i.ned.
WHEREFORE, Defe'ndants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:
A. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a def~nse in the underlying case as it is
." in breach of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a defense to Main
Street under the te~ of the insurance contract that ACE entered into;
B. Awarding costs, and disbursements for this action and the defense of the
.', underlying action, as well as indemnification for settlements, verdicts or judgments in the
, .:: 'tInder-lying action bJ:ou'ght agamst Main Street by Lori Ann Palumbo;
C. AwardiDg actual damages;
D. Awarding attorney's 'fees and costs; and

..
E.. Gnmting such other further and' different relief as the court deems just and
equitable.
AS ANl>FoR A SECOND COUNT FOR NEGL1GENCE
.. ' '23. :.. P1aititiffhereby tepeats, reiterates ~d re-alleges' each and' every one"of~e foregoing. : .-
f • • • • #. .... . . . . " . . ,: ."' • . .
allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 22 as if set forth verbatim· here.

. .
4
24. That, the actions of the Defendants w~re negligent as to Plaintiff and caused substantial
dattJage to the Plaintiffs business by dropping its defense of the underlying lawsuit at the
eleventh hour.
25. Defendant ACE as an insurer had a duty to act professionally and yet negligently
handled the defense of the claim herein and relied upon incorrect assumptions to deprive Main
Street of a defense.
26. Main Street has been damaged by the actions of the defendants in an amount to be
determined.
WHEREFORE, Defendants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:
A. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as it is
in breac}1 of contract .and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a defense to Main
,.. Street under the term of the insurance contract that ACE entered into;
B. Awarding costs, and disbursements for this action and the defenSe of the
.' : tinderlying action, as' well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or judgments in the'
" ,
" ,.: Underlying action brought against ~ain Street by Lori Ann Palumbo;
. .
C. Awarding actual damages;
D. Awarding attorney's fees and costS; and
E. Granting such other further and different. relief as the' court deexm just 'and
equitable.
AS AND FORA'THIRD COtTItt FOR EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL,
WAIVER AND 'DETRIMENTAL 'RELIANCE
27. Plaintiff hereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every one of the foregoing·
allegations contained iIi paragraphs 1 through 26 as if set forth verbatim here.
5
28. That, the actions of the Defendants resulted in a detriment to Plaintiff after reasonable
reliance and payment"ofpremium which should result in an estoppel of Defendant's actions to
deny coverage, as Plaintiff s expectations of coverage were reasonable under the circumstances.
Plaintiff relied on the defense provided to it and is now in a terrible position on the eve of trial as
it has to pay for and conduct its own defense without even the promise of indenmification.
Defendants should be stopped from denying coverage and withdrawing a defense at this late
stage of the case. Alternatively, Defendants should be deemed to have waived the exclusion they
relied upon to waive coverage by not investigating these issues until the eve of trial.
A. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as it is
iii bteach of contract and ordering'the Defendants to specifically provide a defense to Main
S'tteet under, the teim of the insurance contract that ACE entered into;
B. Awarding costs, and dis~U:rsements for this action and the defense of the
undetlying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or judgments in the '
\tnderlying action brought a:gamst Main Street by LOri Ann Palumbo;
D~ Awarding attomey's fees and costS; and

-,
E. Granting such other further and different relief as the couit deems just and
,equitable.
. AS AND J!OR A J!OURTH COUNT FOR UNJUST _ENRlC~NT
29. Plaintifthereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every one of the foregoing
allegations contained in paragraphs' 1 through 28 as if set forth verbatim here.

30. That, the actions of the Defendants resulted in a detriment to Plaintiff after reasonable
reliance and payment of premium which should result in an estoppel of Defendant's actions to
deny coverage, as Plaintiffs expectations of coverage were reasonable under the circumstances.
31. In the alternative, Defendants should refund the premium should that court find that no
meeting of the minds took place or otherwise that ~e contract of insurance should be rescinded.
A.. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as it is
in breach of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a defense to Main
Street under the term of the insurance contract that ACE entered into;
underlying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or judgments in the
. un<,lerlying action brought against M~in Street by Lori Ann Palumbo;
D. Awardmg attorney's fees and costs; and
Eo"' Granti1lg. such other further and different relief as the court deems just and
. equitable.
AS AND FOR A Inai'D COUNT AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS FOR

CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD
. 32. . 'Plaintiffs hereby repeats, ·reiterates and re-alleges"· each and every one of the
.' ~ .... . .. . . : ... '.. . : . . .. . . . . . ." ..'
foregoing 'allegationS contained in paragraphS 1 through 31 as if set forth verbatim
herein.
7
33. Upon information and belief, the defendants are liable for harming the business
interests of Main Street by fraudulent claims handling to their benefit hy means of
behavior that the court should construe as a constructive fraud,. in that ACE purported
to faithfully honor his duty to Main Street under the contract, to both defend and
indemnifY in exchange for the payment of premium, but which was violated by the
making of deceptive material misrepresentations and or omissiQDS of past or existing
facts or remaining silent when a duty to speak existed, compounded by inducing
detrimental reliance thereon by Main Street, proximately causing injury to the Plaintiff
as coverage was wrongly denied and a defense of litigation withdrawn. In essence,
ACE has acted as if the contractual promises it made were never intended to be kept.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as
follows:
A Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as it is
in b~each of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a
defense to Main street under the tenn of the insurance contract that ACE ..
entered into;
B. Aw~ing costs, and disbursements for this action and the defense of the
undedying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or
judgments in the underlying act~on brought against Main Street by Lori Ann
Palumbo;
C.. Awarding actualt.damages;

.
: .
D: Awarding attomey;~ fee~ and costs; and
. E. ~ting such other further and differ~nt relief as the court deems just and
8
equitable.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH COUNT AGAINST ACE FOR BREACH OF

FIDUCIARY DUTY
34. Plaintiffs hereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every one of the
foregoing allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 33 as if set forth verbatim
herein.
35. Upon information and belief: ACE breached its fiduciary obligations to Main
Street as it had a duty to defend and indemnify and was intimately involved in the
defense of the underlying suit mentioned supra.
36. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount to be
determined which. Plaintiffs are entitled to and demand compensatory damages, punitive
damages and attorneys' fees.
. , ' .'
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as
follows:
A. Declaritig .that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as
'it ,is in breach of contract and ordering the Defendants to specificaiiy provide a
defense to Main Street under the term of the insurance contract that ACE entered.
. ,
into;
underlyiIig action, as well. as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts ot
ju4giIieiits in the underlying action brought against Main Street by Lori Ann
,Pal~;.
C. Awarding actual damages and interest;
D.' .Compensatory Da.mages; .
9
E. Treble Damages where appropriate;
F. Punitive Damages;
G. Awarding costs, and disbursements for this action;
H. Attorneys' fees and Costs; and
1. Any and all such other, further and different relief which
this Court finds just and pr~per under the circumstances
including discovery which plaintiffs earnestly seek.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH COUNT OF COMNION LAW FRAUD
37. Plaintiffs hereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and everyone of the
herein.
38. Using fraudulent andlor material misrepresentation and nondisclosure, Defendants
induced the Plaintiff to enter into a contract of insurance

. for errors and omissions
~. .., on a claims
made basis which it knew would be handled in such a way as to deny coverage as a final result.
39: Defendants, "then- predecessors andlor assignors acted at all times relevant "knowingly", with,
. ' fraudulent mtent, andlor knowingly obtaincXl the fCuits ofth~ bud
,46~.'. The miSrepre~eritations mRde 'by Defendants, th~ir predecessors andlor assignors
.substantially contributed to 'Defendants' decision to enter into the insurance contract

. . ~ .
41. p·1aiJitiffs justifiably relied upon these misrepresentations.
42. i?iaintiffs' sUffered damages as a result of the fraud.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with co~ against Defendants
as follows:
••• "I
A." Declaring that ACE' owes Main Street a defenSe mthe underlying case as '
it is in 'breach of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a
10
defense to Main Street under the term of the insurance contract that ACE entered
into;
underlying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or
judgments in the underlying action brought against Main Street by Lori ·Ann
Palumbo;
D. Compensatory Damages;
I. Anya!ld all such other, further and .different relief which

this Court finds just and proper under the circumstances
... '
. AS.AND .FOR AN EIGHTH COUNT OF CONsUMER FRAUD'
. ,. '43~ ·PIaintifI$ hereby tepeats, reiteiates and re-alleges each and every one of the
foregoing allegations oontained in paragraphs 1 through 42 as if set forth verb~tim
herein.
44.: .
Defendants,. their. .. p~edecessor
.~
and/or assignor
".' .
eng~ge4
..in unconscionable commercial
. .,'" . . ." . .. ~ ..
practices, . deceptio'n, fraud,· mIse . p~tense, mIse promise· and/or misrepresentations, or
alternatively, or in addition, engaged in acts of omission, including "ut not 'limited to knowing
11
concealment, suppression and omissions of maferial facts in connection with the claims handling
of the insurance contract.
45. Main Street relied upon promises made by ACE that in exchange for premiums paid ACE
would honor its obligations as an insurance company and both defend and indemnify Plaintiff
should it be sued for covered events on a claims made basis.
46. Defendants, and their predecessor andlor assignor intended for Plaintiff to rely on the
aforementioned acts including the unconscionable commercial practices, deception, fraud, false
pretense, false promise and misrepresentation, and Defendants did rely on the same.
47. The foregoing acts by Defendants, its predecessor and/ot assignor constitute violations of
New Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:88-2, et seq. as a result of which Plaintiffs
suffered ascertainable loss.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with, costs against Defendants 8:S
follows:
A Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as
.it is in breach of con~t and ordering the Defendants to Specifically provide ~
defeils'e to Main Street under the term of the insurance contract that ACE entered'
'info',
B. Awarding costs, 'and disbursements for ~ action and, the defense of tile
underlying' action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, veidicts or
judgments in the underlying action brought against Main Street by Lori Ann
Palumbo;
C. Awarding actual damages and interest; "
12
I. Any and all such other, further and different relief which
this Court finds just and proper under the 'circumstances
AS AND FOR A NINTH COUNT OF COMMON LAW UNCONSCIONABILITY
48. Plaintiffs hereby repeats, reiterates and re ..alleges each and every one of the
herein.
49. Plaintiff, its predecessor and/or assignor engaged in unconscionable commercial
practices, ,deception, fraud, mIse pretense, mIse promise and/or misrepresentations, or'
,: , alt~tively, or in addition, engaged in acts of omission, including but not l~ed to knowing
, '" ': eo11c.ent; suppression ~d omissions of material filets.
,SO.' Piaintift; its 'predecessor and/or assignor intended for Defendants to rely on the'
. : ; ..:
':, afdi'ementloned acts aitdlot' omissions including the unconscionable commercial ~tic~s, '
deception, fraud, faIse pretense, false promise and misrepresentation, and Defendailts did rely ~n '
the same.
51. The foregoing acts by Plaintiff, its predecessor and/or assignor constitute unconstionable
,"
wm;!REFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as f911ows:
13
A. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as
it is in breach of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a
defense to Main Street under the tenn of the insurance contract that ACE entered
into;
underlying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or
judgments in the underlying action brought against Main Street by Lori Ann
Palumbo;
G. Awarding costs, . .and disb11I'S.~ments for this acti~n; .
this 'Court finds just and proper under the circumstances
·AS ANn'ROR A mNm coUNT FOR BREACH OF COVENANT' OF GoOD FAITH

AND FAIR DEALING, i.e. BAD FAITH
52. . Piaintiff hereby repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every one of the
herein. ..... "
53. Defendants ~ a duty as a fiduciary and as an insurance Company to abide by the
terms of the insurance contract and defend and indenmify Main Street within the
14
boundaries of the policy. Accordingly, when said Defendants elected to disclaIm their
coverage of Main Street and withdraw their defense on the eve of trial based upon a
shallow analysis of whether Main Street had pre-existing knowledge of a claim, they
acted in contravention of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and in fact acted in
bad faith.
54. Main Street was damaged thereby, and was placed in jeopardy of having to
fmance any potential verdict, judgment or settlement out of its own coffers.
55. Although this arises out of a breach of contract, punitive damages are appropriate
as the caSe involves a fiduciary relationship. ACE's use of the policy exclusion based
upon pre-existing knowledge to exclude coverage at the eleventh hour was patently
improper as there was no bona fide evidence that Main Street was aware of any claim.
'Accordingly, punitive damages ,should apply.
, WHEREFORE, P18intiffs seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:
A. Declaring that ACE owes Main Street a defense in the underlying case as
it is in breach of, contract and ot:dering the Defendants to specifically 'provide a
defenSe to. ~aiti Street under the teni1 of the insurance contract thai ACE entered
into;
underlYing action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or
judgme~ts in the underlying action br,ought against Main' Street by Lori Ann
..Palumbo;
C.' Awarding actu&.l damages 8.n4.inter~st;.
D. .' COmpensatory Damages;
15
O. Awarding costs, and disbursements for this action;
this Court finds just and proper under the circumstances
including discovery which plain~iffs earnestly seek.
56. The foregoing counts, causes 0 f action and allegations, as stated above, are hereby
repeated, reiterated, re-alleged and incorporated into each other, as if set forth verbatim therein,
so as to specifically augment factually each and every cause of action, regar~less of placement
within this verified complaint. Punitive damages are hereby expressly claimed as to the
outrageous behavior of Defendants.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiffs demand trial by jury,as to aU issues herein so triable.
:,
TRIAL COUNSEL DESIGNATION

t .,.6 * •••
Pleas"e ~ advised that ~w:suant to R. 4:5 .. 1, Robert G. RiCco, Esq., is hereby designated
as Trial Counsel in the above matter. "
R..; 4:5-1(b)(21 CERTIFICATION OF ATTORNEY,
Pursuant to R. 4:5-1(b)(2), I hereby certify that to the best of my
. knowledge, informatiQ~ and belie( the' within matter, is not the subj~t of. any .' ' ,
...... ,
, ",
.. ~.... • " . . ~.O' ." .. • .. .. . . . ' ...... .
, ; other action or proceeding pe:nding" in any court, and is not the subject of a
16
• f\ •
pending arbitration proceeding and is not the subject of any other contemplated
action or arbitration proceeding. I certify that the foregoing statements made by
me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are
willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
DATED:r:;) . rI. . L-{, ZItI/v LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT G. RICCO, ESQ.

'Ut:Jf Attorneys for Plaintiff
Robert G. Ricco, Esq.
17
,. ". til
Certification'ofCompliance with Rule 1:38~7(c)
Pursuant to Rule 1:38- (c) I hereby certify that this, the first filed pleading of
any party in an action in the Chancery Division, General Equity or in the Law
Division, Special Civil Part is redacted as to personal identifiers, and further certify
that confidential personal identifiers-have been redacted from documents now
submitted to the court, and will be redacted from all documents submitted in the
future in accordance with Rule 1:38-7(b).
LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT G. RICCO, ESQ.

of Attorneys for Plaintiff
~ , .. '2. '} "L.r_'''----'---::::-c:::::~------
18
... .. ".
VERIFICATION
, of full age, being duly sworn on his oath according to
law, deposes and says:
1) I have read the complaint in this matter and know the contents thereof. The
allegations of the complaint are true to my personal knowledge.
2) I certify that the allegations contained in the complaint are true to the best of my
are willfully false, I am SUbje;1)1:~:ment.

By: Date:
--~~------------------
Witnessed By:
--==---'-':'-~------:r2~
2-
·... ... " ..
20

MAIN STREET TITLE & SETTLEMENT SERVICES, LLC v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY Et Al Complaint

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MAIN STREET TITLE & SETTLEMENT SERVICES, LLC v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY Et Al Complaint

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Case 2:10-cv-06410-JLL -CCC Document 1-1 Filed 12/10/10 Page 2 of 53 PageID: 5

SUPERIOR COURT ·tIIlSEN COUNTY

NOV 0.,3' 2010

-against- Docket No: BER" --------/10

ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE CIVIL ACTION

Main street, Hackensack, NJ, by way of Verified Complaint says:

. ' :bmder Attached hereto as EXlilbit A).

. the Complaint hereto as Exhibit "B").

supporting memorandum of law.

inception date of the policy.

received that letter.

tefused to deliver there once the change of address was filed.

on the eve of triaL

, all that time.

the uriderlying case •

AS AND FOR A' FI:RsT COUNT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT AND

allegations contained· in paragraphs 1 through 17 as if set forth verbatim here.

ultimately was brou~ht by Palumbo.

narrowly interpreting .the exclusion based upon pre-existing knowledge of a claim in

on the eve of trial.

WHEREFORE, Defe'ndants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:

C. AwardiDg actual damages;

D. Awarding attorney's 'fees and costs; and

AS ANl>FoR A SECOND COUNT FOR NEGL1GENCE

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 22 as if set forth verbatim· here.

WHEREFORE, Defendants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:

D. Awarding attorney's fees and costS; and

AS AND FORA'THIRD COtTItt FOR EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL,

WAIVER AND 'DETRIMENTAL 'RELIANCE

allegations contained iIi paragraphs 1 through 26 as if set forth verbatim here.

reliance and payment"ofpremium which should result in an estoppel of Defendant's actions to

WHEREFORE, Defendants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:

\tnderlying action brought a:gamst Main Street by LOri Ann Palumbo;

C. Awarding actual damages;

D~ Awarding attomey's fees and costS; and

. AS AND J!OR A J!OURTH COUNT FOR UNJUST _ENRlC~NT

allegations contained in paragraphs' 1 through 28 as if set forth verbatim here.

WHEREFORE, Defendants seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as follows:

. un<,lerlying action brought against M~in Street by Lori Ann Palumbo;

C. Awarding actual damages;

D. Awardmg attorney's fees and costs; and

AS AND FOR A Inai'D COUNT AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS FOR

foregoing 'allegationS contained in paragraphS 1 through 31 as if set forth verbatim

interests of Main Street by fraudulent claims handling to their benefit hy means of

making of deceptive material misrepresentations and or omissiQDS of past or existing

facts or remaining silent when a duty to speak existed, compounded by inducing

as coverage was wrongly denied and a defense of litigation withdrawn. In essence,

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek a judgment with costs against Defendants as

in b~each of contract and ordering the Defendants to specifically provide a

undedying action, as well as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts or

C.. Awarding actualt.damages;

AS AND FOR A SIXTH COUNT AGAINST ACE FOR BREACH OF

foregoing allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 33 as if set forth verbatim

defense of the underlying suit mentioned supra.

36. As a result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount to be

damages and attorneys' fees.

underlyiIig action, as well. as indemnification for and settlements, verdicts ot

C. Awarding actual damages and interest;

D.' .Compensatory Da.mages; .

E. Treble Damages where appropriate;

G. Awarding costs, and disbursements for this action;

H. Attorneys' fees and Costs; and

AS AND FOR A SEVENTH COUNT OF COMNION LAW FRAUD