United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING AND ORDER ON MOTION TO AMEND THE
A. BOLDEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
February 9, 2018, Dennis and Erica Moura
(“Plaintiffs” or “The Mouras”) filed
a civil Complaint in Connecticut Superior Court against
Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company
(“Harleysville”) and Liberty Insurance
Corporation (“Liberty” and together,
“Defendants”), the companies that allegedly
insured their home. Compl., ECF No. 1-1.
Mouras allege that Defendants failed to honor their
homeowner's insurance policies when the Mouras'
basement walls cracked due to allegedly faulty concrete.
Compl. ¶¶ 4, 8, 19, 26, 28, 38.
March 9, 2018, Harleysville removed the case to this Court on
diversity grounds under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a). Notice of
Removal, ECF No. 1, ¶¶ 5-7.
April 18, 2018, before Defendants had responded to the
Complaint, the Mouras filed a motion to add one count against
Liberty and three counts against Harleysville. Mot. to Amend
or Correct, ECF No. 19.
9, 2018, Liberty objected to the motion to amend with respect
to the Mouras' new claim against Liberty. Obj. to Pls.
Mot. for Leave to Amend Compl., ECF No. 25.
reasons set forth below, the Court now GRANTS in part
and DENIES in part Plaintiffs' motion to amend
or correct the Complaint, ECF No. 19.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Mouras allegedly purchased their home in 2009. Compl. ¶
3. The home was allegedly built in 1998, id., using
concrete “likely from the J.J. Mottes Concrete Company,
” id. ¶ 9. In March of 2017, the Mouras
allegedly noticed horizontal and vertical cracks in their
basement walls. Id. ¶ 6. After investigating
the cause of the cracking, the Mouras concluded that it was
likely due to a form of concrete that oxidizes, expands, and
breaks the bonds of the concrete. Id. ¶ 9.
their view, it was “only a question of time until the
basement walls of [their] home [fell] in due to the exterior
pressure from the surrounding soil.” Id.
¶ 12. Accordingly, they allegedly filed claims for
insurance coverage with Defendants. Id. ¶¶
15, 37. In their Complaint, the Mouras alleged that
Harleysville had not yet decided whether it would cover their
alleged losses, id. ¶ 19, and that Liberty had
denied their claim for coverage, id. ¶ 38.
Plaintiffs sought Declaratory Judgment against Harleysville,
and damages for Breach of Contract, violations of the
Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act (CUIPA) and
Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA) against
Liberty. Id. ¶¶ 23-61.
Harleysville's removal of the case to this Court, Notice
of Removal, the Court issued a Standing Order on pretrial
deadlines, Order on Pretrial Deadlines, ECF No. 7. Three days
later, the parties file a consent motion for an extension of
time until April 30, 2018 for Harleysville to respond to the
Complaint. Motion for Extension, ECF No. 15. On March 13,
2018, the Court granted that motion. Order, ECF No. 16.
April 18, 2018, before Defendants responded to the Complaint,
the Mouras filed the present motion to amend or correct. Mot.
to Amend or Correct. The Mouras allege that, since the filing
of their initial Complaint, Harleysville has “issued a
formal coverage decision denying the plaintiffs' claim
for coverage.” Id. ¶ 8. The Mouras
contend that that “denial gives rise to additional
claims against the defendant including breach of contract,
breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing, and unfair and deceptive practices in violation of
[CUTPA] and [CUIPA].” Id. ...