1

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

ANNA GONZALEZ and RONALD K. 

PAGE, on behalf of themselves and all others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

Defendant.

Civil Action No.: SA-20-CV-617-FB

DEFENDANT STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY’S ANSWER AND 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO PLAINTIFFS’ CONSOLIDATED AMENDED CLASS

ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company files this Answer and Affirmative Defenses 

to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial 

(“Plaintiff’s Complaint”).

1 Without waiving any of the defenses under the policies of insurance 

under which Plaintiff purports to be claiming in this lawsuit, and still insisting upon any and all 

policy conditions, exclusions, and other policy terms now or later arising, Defendant respectfully 

shows the Court as follows:

 1 Plaintiff Anna Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) filed a Stipulated Notice of Dismissal as to her claims on March 22, 2021 

[Dkt 75]. As of the time of this filing, the Court had not yet issued an order granting Gonzalez’s requested dismissal 

from this action. Nevertheless, in light of the stipulated dismissal, this Answer treats allegations set forth in the 

complaint purporting to be asserted on behalf of both Gonzalez and Ronald K. Page as asserted exclusively by Mr. 

Page. Accordingly, all references herein to “Plaintiff” relate exclusively to Ronald K. Page, and all references to “the 

Policy” relate exclusively to the subject life insurance policy issued to him.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 1 of 23
2

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

The introductory paragraph of Plaintiff’s Complaint does not warrant a response, but State 

Farm denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief sought by way of this lawsuit. Except as 

expressly admitted in this Answer, State Farm denies all of Plaintiff’s claims and allegations.

INTRODUCTION

1. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that it charged any 

amounts in excess of those authorized by the policy terms and that this case meets the requirements 

for certification of a class under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

2. State Farm denies these allegations.

3. State Farm denies these allegations.

4. State Farm denies these allegations.

5. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purport to bring this case as a class action under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but denies that the case meets the requirements 

for certification of a class and otherwise denies these allegations.

PARTIES

6. State Farm lacks information sufficient to admit or deny this allegation and on that 

basis denies the allegation.

7. As to Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, no answer is required by virtue of the 

filing of the Stipulated Notice of Dismissal as to Gonzalez’s claims.

8. State Farm admits the allegations in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9. State Farm does not contest this Court’s jurisdiction at this time. State Farm denies 

that the case meets the requirements for certification of a class and otherwise denies these 

allegations.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 2 of 23
3

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

10. State Farm lacks information sufficient to admit or deny this allegation as to the 

Plaintiff’s residence, and on that basis denies it. As to the specific allegations regarding Gonzalez, 

no answer is required by virtue of the filing of the Stipulated Notice of Dismissal as to Gonzalez’s 

claims. State Farm denies that “a substantial portion of the events giving rise to [Plaintiff’s] causes 

of action occurred in this District.” Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the remaining 

allegations of this paragraph. 

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

11. State Farm admits that Plaintiff Page purchased a flexible premium adjustable life 

insurance policy bearing the policy number LF-1518-9386, and a policy date of February 3, 1997 

with an initial basic amount of $100,000, issued in Texas. State Farm admits that Plaintiff Page is 

the owner and insured under this policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the 

allegations in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

12. As to Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, no answer is required by virtue of the 

filing of the Stipulated Notice of Dismissal as to Gonzalez’s claims. 

13. State Farm admits that it issued Plaintiff’s Policy. Except as expressly admitted, 

State Farm denies the allegations contained in this paragraph.

14. State Farm admits these allegations.

15. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant denies the allegations of this 

paragraph.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 3 of 23
4

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

16. The Policy is the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation 

inconsistent with the terms of the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant 

denies the allegations of this paragraph.

17. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant denies the allegations of this 

paragraph.

18. State Farm admits that it has collected premiums and deducted Policy charges 

according to the terms of the Policy and that the premiums and charges are shown to Plaintiff on 

his annual notices. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of the Policy. 

Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff’s

Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

19. State Farm admits that the Policy contains an “Account Value” that is defined in 

the Policy and admits that the Policy provides a death benefit. State Farm denies any allegation 

inconsistent with the terms of the Policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the 

allegations contained in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and specifically denies that this case 

meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure.

20. State Farm admits that the Policy establishes the definition of “Account Value” and 

the authorized deductions in the Policy. State Farm further admits that the Account Value can earn 

interest as authorized by the Policy. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms 

of the Policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in 

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 4 of 23
5

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

Paragraph 20 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements 

for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

21. State Farm admits that the Account Value of the Policy was administered according 

to the terms of the Policy. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of the

Policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 21 

of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

22. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. State Farm 

admits that the Policy authorizes a premium expense charge and refers to the Policy for the terms 

thereof. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of the Policy and specifically 

denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure.

23. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant denies the allegations of this 

paragraph.

24. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. State Farm further admits that the Deduction Date under the Page Policy is the 3rd of 

each month. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

25. State Farm admits that the Policy defines how charges may be deducted from the 

Account Value. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of the Policy. Except 

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 5 of 23
6

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 25 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

26. State Farm admits that Plaintiff’s Policy defines how charges may be deducted from 

the Account Value and premium payments and that all charges and deductions on the Policy are 

shown to Plaintiff on his annual notices. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the 

terms of the Policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

27. State Farm admits that Plaintiff’s Policy authorizes State Farm to take a “Monthly 

Deduction” from Plaintiff’s Account Value each month and that the deductions are shown to 

Plaintiff on his annual notices. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of the 

Policy. State Farm denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and

specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

28. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant denies the allegations of this 

paragraph and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

29. State Farm admits that Plaintiff’s Policy has a monthly expense charge of $5.00. 

State Farm denies the remaining allegations in Paragraph 29 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and 

specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 6 of 23
7

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

30. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, Defendant denies the allegations of this 

paragraph. and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

31. State Farm admits that Plaintiff has partially quoted from the Policy. The Policy is

the best evidence of its contents. State Farm denies any allegation inconsistent with the terms of 

the Policy. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations of this 

paragraph and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

32. Paragraph 32 of Plaintiff’s Complaint contains legal conclusions that do not require 

a response. To the extent a response is required, State Farm denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 32 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

33. State Farm admits that the Policy contains a paragraph titled “Monthly Cost of 

Insurance Rates” and refers to the Policy for the terms thereof. State Farm denies any allegation 

inconsistent with the terms of the Policy. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the 

allegations contained in Paragraph 33 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and specifically denies that this case 

meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure.

34. State Farm admits that age, sex and rate class are among the factors that the 

insurance industry has considered related to mortality expectations. Except as expressly admitted, 

State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 34 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

35. State Farm denies these allegations.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 7 of 23
8

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

36. State Farm denies these allegations.

37. State Farm admits that the Policy authorizes State Farm to make periodic 

deductions from the Account Value and refers to the Policy for the terms thereof. Except as 

expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

38. State Farm admits that Plaintiff’s Policy discloses what deductions are made each 

month and refers to the Policy for the terms thereof. State Farm denies the remaining allegations 

in Paragraph 38 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. State Farm specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

39. State Farm denies these allegations.

40. State Farm denies these allegations.

41. State Farm denies these allegations.

42. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

43. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

44. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

45. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

46. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 8 of 23
9

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

47. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

48. State Farm denies these allegations.

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

49. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purports to bring this case as a class action under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but denies that this case meets the requirements 

for certification of a class. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 49 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

50. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purports to bring this case as a class action under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure but denies that this case meets the requirements 

for certification of a class. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 50 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

51. State Farm denies these allegations.

52. State Farm denies these allegations.

53. State Farm denies these allegations.

54. State Farm denies these allegations.

55. State Farm denies these allegations.

56. State Farm denies these allegations.

57. State Farm denies these allegations.

58. State Farm denies these allegations.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 9 of 23
10

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

COUNT I: ALLEGED BREACH OF CONTRACT

(Cost of Insurance Charge)

59. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations. 

60. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purchased the Policy. Except as expressly admitted, 

State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 60 of Plaintiff’s Complaint and 

specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

61. State Farm admits that the Plaintiff’s Policy is valid and enforceable. Except as 

expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 61 of Plaintiff’s

Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

62. State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 62 of Plaintiff’s

Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification under 

Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

63. State Farm denies these allegations.

64. State Farm denies these allegations.

65. State Farm denies these allegations.

66. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. State 

Farm further specifically denies that the alleged breach is “ongoing and continuing.”

COUNT II: ALLEGED BREACH OF CONTRACT

(Expense Charge)

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 10 of 23
11

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

67. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

68. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

69. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

70. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. State 

Farm further specifically denies that the alleged breach is “ongoing and continuing.”

COUNT III: ALLEGED CONVERSION

71. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

72. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

73. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

74. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

75. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

76. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 11 of 23
12

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

77. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

78. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

79. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

COUNT IV: ALLEGED BREACH OF THE DUTY OF 

GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING

80. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

81. State Farm admits that the Plaintiff’s Policy is valid and enforceable. Except as 

expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 81 of Plaintiff’s

Complaint and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for class certification 

under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

82. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

83. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

84. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

COUNT V: ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE TEXAS INSURANCE CODE

85. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 12 of 23
13

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

86. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

87. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

88. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

89. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

90. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

91. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

92. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

93. State Farm denies these allegations.

94. State Farm denies these allegations.

95. State Farm admits these allegations.

96. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

COUNT VI: ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE TEXAS DECEPTIVE TRADE 

PRACTICES-CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

97. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 13 of 23
14

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

98. Paragraph 98 of Plaintiff’s Complaint contains legal conclusions that do not 

require a response. To the extent a response is required, State Farm denies the allegations 

contained in Paragraph 98 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

99. State Farm denies these allegations.

100. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

101. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

102. State Farm denies these allegations.

103. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

104. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

105. State Farm denies these allegations.

106. State Farm admits these allegations.

107. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

COUNT VII: ALLEGED DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

108. State Farm incorporates and restates by reference its responses to all preceding 

allegations.

109. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 14 of 23
15

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

110. State Farm denies these allegations and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. State 

Farm further specifically denies that the alleged breach “continues.”

111. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purportsto seek a declaration of the parties’ rights 

and duties. Except as expressly admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in 

Paragraph 111 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, and specifically denies that this case meets the 

requirements for class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

112. State Farm admits that Plaintiff purports to seek an injunction. Except as expressly 

admitted, State Farm denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 112 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, 

and specifically denies that this case meets the requirements for injunctive relief or for class 

certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

113. State Farm denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief sought by way of this 

lawsuit, as in the Prayer of Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

STATE FARM’S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

114. Nothing herein may be construed to suggest that State Farm bears the burden of 

proof on any of the issues set forth below. 

115. FIRST DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the putative 

class are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statutes of limitations.

116. SECOND DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the 

putative class are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of unclean hands and/or estoppel. 

Plaintiff received the entire benefit of the bargain and cannot now assert a claim for breach. 

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 15 of 23
16

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

117. THIRD DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the 

putative class are barred, in whole or in part, because the Plaintiff understood the terms of his 

contract and appreciated the benefits of the contracts from the time it was issued to the present. 

Plaintiff and members of the putative class have taken actions consistent with the policies and in 

reliance on the policies, including receipt of interest, modification of rate class in the event of a 

change in tobacco status, receipt of loans, waivers of monthly deductions, receipt of cash surrender 

value, and receipt of death benefits.

118. FOURTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the 

putative class are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of waiver, including without limitation 

the voluntary payment doctrine.

119. FIFTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the putative 

class are barred, in whole or in part, by their failure to mitigate damages, if any.

120. SIXTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the putative 

class are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of laches because Plaintiff waited many years 

to bring the claims in this action, including his claim for injunctive relief, and State Farm is 

prejudiced and disadvantaged by this undue delay.

121. SEVENTH DEFENSE. Claims of the putative class are barred by or otherwise did 

not survive the surrender or termination of their respective policies.

122. EIGHTH DEFENSE. Claims of the putative class are barred by or otherwise did 

not survive either the death of the owner of the respective policies or the death of the insured.

123. NINTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the 

putative class are barred in whole or in part by the doctrines of payment, accord and satisfaction, 

recoupment, set-off, and/or election of remedies.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 16 of 23
17

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

124. TENTH DEFENSE. The breach of contract claims of any class member who did 

not pay a premium for the alleged coverage for which they seek to recover payment fail for lack 

of consideration.

125. ELEVENTH DEFENSE. The Complaint, and each purported cause of action 

alleged therein, is barred by the conduct, actions and inactions of Plaintiff and/or the persons on 

whose behalf he purports to bring this action, under the doctrine of ratification.

126. TWELFTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members of the 

putative class are barred, in whole or in part, by the filed rate doctrine or similar legal doctrines.

127. THIRTEENTH DEFENSE. With respect to the claims of Plaintiff and/or the 

putative class, the terms and conditions imposed with respect to the insurance that is the subject of 

the Complaint complied with all applicable statutes, regulations, and/or filed rates and policy 

forms. To the extent that the causes of action advanced in the Complaint challenge the terms 

contained in policy forms accepted for those terms and conditions, such claims are barred as a 

matter of law, because, among other reasons, all such claims seek to obtain a contract term that 

would vary from the filed and accepted forms.

128. FOURTEENTH DEFENSE. The claims advanced in the Complaint by Plaintiff, 

and/or the persons on whose behalf they purport to bring this action, insofar as they relate to alleged 

conduct that is subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of one or more regulatory or administrative 

agencies or bodies, are preempted and/or subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of those regulatory 

or administrative agencies under the doctrines of primary and/or exclusive jurisdiction. 

Alternatively, such claims are barred by the absence of any private right of action with regard to 

conduct submitted to the discretion of a regulatory or administrative agency or body.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 17 of 23
18

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

129. FIFTEENTH DEFENSE. The Complaint and each and every claim for relief are 

barred by the Parol Evidence Rule, which precludes the claimants from varying the written terms 

of the policies.

130. SIXTEENTH DEFENSE. The adjudication of the claims of the putative class 

through purported class-wide proof would violate State Farm’s right to due process of law and 

right to trial by jury guaranteed by the United States and Texas Constitutions.

131. SEVENTEENTH DEFENSE. The claims and/or damages of Plaintiff and the 

alleged putative class are barred, in whole or in part, by the terms, conditions, limitations, and 

exclusions contained within their respective policies and/or by public policy or express provision 

of law.

132. EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s Policy and those owned by those of the 

putative class inform the policyholder that State Farm will determine the cost of insurance rate to 

be applied to the policy Insured by reference to that Insured’s “age on the policy anniversary, sex, 

and applicable rate class.” Because that is exactly what State Farm did for each Insured for a policy 

on Form 94030 issued in Texas, there is no breach of the policy, nor any conversion. Plaintiff’s

Complaint, therefore, fails to state a claim upon which any relief can be granted.

133. NINETEENTH DEFENSE. State Farm advised each policyholder, including 

Plaintiff, how the cost of insurance rate for that policy Insured would be determined, and State 

Farm determined each Insured’s rate as it had so advised that policyholder. Accordingly, there is 

no basis for any claim of fraud and deception.

134. TWENTIETH DEFENSE. Plaintiff and some or all members of the putative class 

lack standing to bring some or all of the claims set forth in the Complaint because they have not 

suffered any injury in fact.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 18 of 23
19

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

135. TWENTY-FIRST DEFENSE. Plaintiff cannot assert untimely claims based on 

fraudulent concealment as alleged in the Complaint as State Farm fully disclosed all material 

information to Plaintiff and its other policyholders and had no duty to disclose the additional 

information that is identified in the complaints, nor did State Farm have any intent to deceive 

Plaintiff or any other policyholder.

136. TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE. Plaintiff cannot assert untimely claims under 

fraudulent concealment as alleged in the Complaint because he has not alleged fraud with the 

particularity required by Rule 9(b) of the Rules of Civil Procedure.

137. TWENTY-THIRD DEFENSE. Plaintiff and some of the putative class members’ 

claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel.

138. TWENTY-FOURTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff and some of the putative class 

members have released the claims set forth in the Complaint, including through having participated 

in a class action settlement.

139. TWENTY-FIFTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff, and the other persons they purport to 

represent, suffered no damages by reason of any act or omission of State Farm.

140. TWENTY-SIXTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members 

of the putative class are barred, in whole or in part, due to Plaintiff’s and putative class members’ 

own actions, negligence or legal fault.

141. TWENTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to allege a claim or 

conduct for which punitive, exemplary and/or treble damages can be recovered. The prayer for 

such damages recovery should therefore be stricken. Plaintiff has not alleged any facts sufficient 

to support a finding that State Farm has acted with malice or is guilty of oppression or any other 

facts sufficient to recover punitive, exemplary or treble damages. Further, punitive damages may 

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 19 of 23
20

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

not be recovered to the extent they are excessive under the Constitution of the United States or any 

state law applicable to claims brought by residents of the respective states in which each member 

of the putative class purchased his or her policy. Further, an award of punitive damages in this case 

would violate due process under the Constitution of the United States or any state law applicable 

to claims brought by residents of the respective states in which each member of the putative class 

purchased his or her policy. Further, State Farm at all times has acted in good faith and therefore 

is not liable for any punitive, exemplary, or treble damages.

142. TWENTY-EIGHTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s prayer for equitable relief is barred 

because Plaintiff, and the persons on whose behalf Plaintiff purports to bring this action, have 

adequate remedies at law.

143. TWENTY-NINTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s claims and the claims of all members 

of the putative class are barred by the economic loss rule.

144. THIRTIETH DEFENSE. Plaintiff and members of the putative class do not have 

a property interest or other interest in the policy account value that arise from any source other 

than the contract that is legally sufficient to support a claim for conversion. 

145. THIRTY-FIRST DEFENSE. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief for 

conversion because, among other things, a claim for conversion cannot be based on an alleged 

overcharge.

146. THIRTY-SECOND DEFENSE. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief for 

conversion because, among other things, the amount claimed must be a specific sum identified by 

the plaintiff.

147. THIRTY-THIRD DEFENSE. The Complaint fails to state a claim upon which 

any relief can be granted with regard to Plaintiff’s cause of action for Breach of the Covenant of 

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 20 of 23
21

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

Good Faith and Fair Dealing and should be dismissed. Texas does not imply a duty of good faith 

and fair dealing in every contract and Plaintiff has failed to allege the limited circumstances under 

which Texas courts have recognized the duty in the insurance context.

148. THIRTY-FOURTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief

under the Texas Insurance Code. Plaintiff cannot establish that State Farm violated § 541.051 or 

any other provision of the Texas Insurance Code, and specifically cannot establish that State Farm 

issued any illustration or other statement misrepresenting the terms of any policy to Plaintiff or 

any members of the putative class, nor any other purported unlawful and deceptive trade practice 

in violation of the Code. Further, Plaintiff cannot establish that all putative class members received 

or relied on any illustration. 

149. THIRTY-FIFTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for relief under 

the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act because he cannot establish that 

State Farm represented to Plaintiff or any member of the putative class that the policies “had 

sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities which they do not 

have.” See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. §17.46(b)(5). Rather, State Farm advised each 

policyholder, including Plaintiff, how the cost of insurance rate for the respective policy Insured 

would be determined, and State Farm determined each Insured’s rate as it had so advised the 

policyholders.

150. THIRTY-SIXTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff cannot assert deception or any alleged 

representation by State Farm that violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer 

Protection Act because he has not alleged fraud with the particularity required by Rule 9(b) of the 

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 21 of 23
22

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

151. THIRTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state a claim 

upon which any relief can be granted. 

152. RESERVATION OF OTHER DEFENSES. State Farm is informed and believes 

that it may have other defenses of which it is presently unaware. State Farm reserves the right to 

allege additional defenses upon discovery of additional facts during the course of discovery.

153. Wherefore, State Farm denies that Plaintiff is entitled to any of the relief they seek, 

whether on behalf of themselves or a putative class, and prays for judgment as follows.

a. That Plaintiff take nothing by their Complaint;

b. That the Court dismiss, with prejudice, Plaintiff’s Complaint, and award 

State Farm its recoverable costs; and

c. That the Court award State Farm such other and further relief as it may deem 

just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

154. State Farm hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.

Dated: March 23, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Susan E. Egeland

Wayne B. Mason 

ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE

Texas Bar No. 13158950

wayne.mason@faegredrinker.com

Susan E. Egeland

Texas Bar No. 24040854

susan.egeland@faegredrinker.com

FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

1717 Main Street, Suite 5400

Dallas, Texas 75201

Phone: (469) 357-2500

Fax: (469) 327-0860

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 22 of 23
23

Defendant State Farm Life Insurance Company’s Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiffs’ First 

Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial

Shaunda A. Patterson-Strachan 

Admitted pro hac vice

shaunda.pattersonstrachan@faegredrinker.com

Waldemar J. Pflepsen Jr. 

Admitted pro hac vice

waldemar.pflepsen@faegredrinker.com

FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP

1500 K Street NW, Suite 1100

Washington, D.C. 20005

Phone: (202) 842-8800

Fax: (202) 842-8465

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on March 23, 2021, a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document was electronically filed with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which will 

send notification of such filing to all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to 

electronic service.

/s/ Susan E. Egeland

SUSAN E. EGELAND

Case 5:20-cv-00617-FB-ESC Document 76 Filed 03/23/21 Page 23 of 23