District Court, S.D. New York, 2025

Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC

Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC
District Court, S.D. New York · Decided November 12, 2025
Berkley Insurance Company v. Weddle Law PLLC

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X : BERKLEY INSURANCE COMPANY, : : Plaintiff, : : 24-CV-08108 (JAV) -v- : : ORDER WEDDLE LAW PLLC, : : Defendant. : : ---------------------------------------------------------------------- X JEANNETTE A. VARGAS, United States District Judge: On October 29, 2025, Defendant and Counterclaim-Plaintiff Weddle Law PLLC (“Defendant”) filed a motion to compel Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant Berkley Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) to produce two sets of documents relating to Plaintiff’s claim investigation and loss reserves. ECF No. 35 (“Mot.”) at 1. Defendant’s motion to compel is GRANTED IN PART.

Concerning the documents Plaintiff withheld due to attorney-client privilege and/or work product doctrine, Plaintiff is ORDERED to submit unredacted copies of the disputed documents to the Court for ex parte, in camera review no later than November 14, 2025.

Concerning the three documents relating to loss reserves, Plaintiff is FURTHER ORDERED to produce those documents to Defendant no later than November 14, 2025.

“Courts in this District have found reserve information relevant where bad faith has been alleged.” 99 Wall Dev. Inc. v. Allied World Specialty Ins. Co., No. 18-CV-126 (RA) (KHP), 2019 WL 2482356, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. June 14, 2019) (citation omitted). “Although New York does not recognize a separate cause of action for bad faith, courts permit bad faith allegations to be included in a complaint as part of a breach of contract cause of action.” /d. (citation omitted).

Defendant “has included bad faith allegations in its [counterclaim] in connection with its breach of contract claim in support of its request for consequential damages and attorneys’ fees.” /d.; see ECF No. 11 at 12. The Court finds that reserve information is “relevant under the broad relevance standard of [Federal] Rule [of Civil Procedure] 26(b)(1).”

Accordingly, Defendant’s motion to compel is GRANTED IN PART.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 12, 2025 LOMMEAE |v ADGA New York, New York “JEANNETTE A. VARGAS / United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.