Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 1 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 2 of 13
'· 

1 Amy N. Vela, Esq. (#027355) 

Timothy G. Tonkin, Esq. (#020709) 

2 PHILLIPS LAW GROUP, P.C. 

3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1500 

3 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 

Tel: (602) 258-8900 

4 Fax: {602) 900-0115 

amvv@phillipslaw.com 

5 minute entries@phillipslaw.com 

6 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

7 

8 

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA 

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA 

9 KIMBERLY NICKERSON, individually, 

10 

11 vs. 

Plaintiff, 

12 CSM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY 

13 (AM), a foreign company; JOHN DOES 1-5; 

JANE DOES 1-5; BLACK CORPORATIONS 

1

4 1-5; and WHITE PAR1NERSHIPS 1-5, 

Defendants. 

Case No.: CV 2 U 'I 7 - 0 ·1 4 4 21 

COMPLAINT 

Contract-Bad Faith 

15 

16 

17 

KIMBERL YNICKERSON, (hereinafter "Plaintiff''), for her Complaint, alleges: 

1. Plaintiff is, and was at all times material hereiri, a resident of the County of 

18 Maricopa, State of Arizona. 

19 2. Defendant CSM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY (hereinafter 

20 "Defendant," unless otherwise indicated) is a foreign company, which is, and was, licensed to 

21 do business in the State of Arizona, and provided and continues to provide insurance services 

. 22 within the State of Arizona, or placed and continues to place insurance products in the stream 

23 of commerce reaching the State of Arizona 

24 3. Defendants JOHN DOES 1-5; JANE DOES 1-5; BLACK CORPORATIONS 1-

25 5; and WHITE PAR1NERSHIPS 1-5 (hereinafter: "fictitious defendants") are those persons. 

and entities whose relationships to the named Defendants or whose acts or omissions give rise 1 . 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 3 of 13
1 to legal responsibility for the damages incurred by Plaintiff, but whose true identities are at 

2 present time unknown to Plaintiff. These persons and entities hereby are notified of Plaintiffs 

3 intention to join them as Defendants if and when additional investigation or discovery reveals 

4 the appropriateness ofsuchjoinder. 

5 4. Upon belief all fictitious Defendants were residents of the County of Maricopa, 

6 State of Arizona; and/or were organized and existing under the laws of Arizona and doing 

7 business in the State of Arizona; and/or were foreign corporations, businesses, etc., qualified to 

8 do business within the State of Arizona, and actually doing business therein on the date of the 

9 accident alleged therein. 

10 5. All acts and events alleged hereafter occurred within the State of Arizona, 

11 making venue proper. 

12 6. The minimum jurisdictional amount established for filing this action has been 

13 satisfied. 

14 7. Defendant CSAA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, either individually or 

15 collectively, issued an automobile policy of insurance, identified as Policy Number AZS16 003377086, to Plainti~ with underinsured motorist coverage in the amount of$100,000.00 for 

17 each person and $300,000.00 for each occurrence. 

18 8. On or about February 6, 2014, Plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle collision 

19 that was caused by the negligence ofunderinsured motorist, Michael Shaffer. 

20 9. As a direct and proximate cause of the negligence of the underinsured driver, 

21 Plaintiff sustained personal injuries in the form of pain, discomfort, suffering, disability, and 

22 anxiety and will experience such personal injury in the future. 

23 II I 

24 II I 

25 ~ .. : 

2 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 4 of 13
.. : 

1 10. As a further direct and proximate cause of the negligence of the underinsured 

2 driver, Plaintiff incurred, and will continue to incur in the future, reasonable expenses for 

3 necessary medical care, treatment and services. 

4 11. As a further direct and proximate cause of the negligence of the underinsured 

5 driver, Plaintiff incurred lost earnings. 

6 - 12. As a further direct and proximate cause of the negligence of the underinsured 

7 driver, Plaintiff sustained general damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of 

8 this court. 

9 13. After recovering the liability limits of the policy of insurance covering the 

l 0 negligence of the underinsured driver, Plaintiff made a claim against the underinsured portion 

11 of the policy issued by Defendant CSAA GENERAL INSURANCE CO:MP ANY to Plaintiff. 

12 . 14. In response to Plaintiff's claims, Defendants failed to adequately investigate 

13 Plaintiff's claims. 

14 15. Defendants also failed to give equal consideration to Plaintiff's claims. 

15 16. In addition, Defendants failed to reasonably and promptly pay Plaintiff for her 

16 loss arising from the motor vehicle accident. 

17 17. Defendants failed to reasonably inform Plaintiff of all her rights and obligations 

18 under the policy of insurance. 

19 18. By _each of their inadequate investigation and adversarial position in processing 

20 Plaintiff's claim, Defendants have.forced Plaintiff to file a lawsuit to recover her damages. 

21 19. By their acts, .Defendants have denied de facto those benefits covered under the 

22 policy. 

23 /// 

24 /// 

25 

3 

... 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 5 of 13
.. 

· . 

1 20. Defendants have failed to compensate Plaintiff the benefits to which she is 

2 rightfully entitled. Defendants have forced Plaintiff to file this Complaint, forcing Plaintiff 

3 through needless adversarial hoops to achieve her rights under the policy. 

4 Countl 

5 Breach of. Contract 

6 21. Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in 

7 Paragraphs 1 through 20 as if fully set forth herein. 

8 22. Defendant's failure to make a good faith offer to pay, and failure to reasonably 

9 and promptly pay Plaintiff for her loss arising from the motor vehicle accident, failure to 

10 timely accept the claim, failure to negotiate this matter in good faith, making false 

11 representation, failure to promptly respond to timely settlement offers, constitute a de facto 

12 denial of coverage. 

13 23. Defendant's same failures also constitute a breach of the insurance contract 

14 entered into by and between Plaintiff and Defendants. 

15 24. At all times relevant to this action, all fictitious Defendants denied. de facto 

16 coverage, or breached the insurance contract by their acts or omissions, or are vicariously 

17 liable for the acts or omissions of Defendant CSAA GENERAL INSURANCE COMP ANY. 

18 25. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's breach, Plaintiffsnstained direct 

19 and consequential damages. 

20 

21 

Count2 

Bad Faith 

22 · 26. Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in 

23 Paragraphs 1 through 25 as if fully set forth herein. 

24 27. Inherent in every contract of insurance is the insurance company's covenant of 

25 good faith and fair dealings. 

4 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 6 of 13
" 

1 28. Defendant's failure to adequately investigate Plaintifrs claims, failure to treat 

2 Plaintifrs claims with equal consideration, failure to make a good faith offer, failure to 

3 promptly investigate and accept the underinsured motorist claim, and failure to make 

4 reasonable efforts to avoid the necessity for litigation constitute a breach of the covenant of 

5 good faith and fair dealings. 

6 29. At all times relevant to this action, all fictitious Defendants breached their · 

7 covenant of good faith and fair dealings by their acts or omissions, or are vicariously liable for 

8 the acts or omissions of Defendant CSAA GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY. 

9 30. As a dlreet and proximate result of Defendant's breach, Plaintiff sustained direct 

l 0 and consequential damages. 

11 31. Further, Plaintiff is also entitled to an award of punitive damages for the reason 

12 that Defendants intended to injure Plaintiff or have acted with a consistent pattern to 

13 undermine the security of its own policies to the detriment of its insureds, including Plaintiff 

14 or, although not intending to cause injury, Defendant's conduct was motivated by spite or ill 

15 will, or Defendants acted to serve their own interests, having reason to know, and consciously 

16 disregarding, a substantial risk that their conduct might significantly injure the rights of others. 

17 

18 

Count3 

U nderinsured Motorist Benefits 

19 32. Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in 

20 Paragraphs 1 through 31 as if fully set forth herein. 

21 33. Because the negligence of an underinsured driver caused Plaintiff to sustain 

22 personal injury and damages, Plaintiff is entitled to fair and reasonable compensation from 

23 Defendants under the underinsured motorist provision of the policy. 

24 34. At all times relevant tci this action, Plaintiff is entitled to fair and reasonable 

25 compensation from fictitious Defendants under the underinsured motorist provision of the 

5 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 7 of 13
·. 

l policy for those damages for which the negligent driver was underinsured, or Defendants are 

2 otherwise vicariously liable to Plaintiff under the policy issued by CSAA GENERAL 

3 INSURANCE COMP ANY. 

4 Demand for Judgment 

5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants for the following: 

6 I. All direct and consequential damages caused by Defendants' breach of the 

7 insurance contract with Plaintiff; 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

2. 

dealings; 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

All damages caused by Defendants' breach of its covenant of good faith and fair 

The full fair amount of underinsured motorist proceeds under the policy; 

General damages for an amount to be proven at trial; 

Special damages for an amount to be proven at trial; 

Punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; 

Attorneys' fees under ARS. § 12-341.01 and costs; 

Pre-and post-judgment interest at the statutory rate; 

16 9. Such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper under the 

17 circumstances. 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

JURY DEMAND 

In the event trial ofthis matter becomes necessary, Plaintiff requests a trial by jury. 

DATED this ~..\"--day of November, 2017. 

~ AmyN. Vela, Esq. 

Timothy G. Tonkin, Esq. 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

6 

Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 8 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 9 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 10 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 11 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 12 of 13
Case 2:17-cv-04471-DLR Document 1-1 Filed 12/04/17 Page 13 of 13