Insurance Expert’s Breach-of-Duty Testimony Admitted

Insurance Expert’s Breach-of-Duty Testimony Admitted

On May 19, 2023, Plaintiff John Gianacopoulos filed this action against Defendants Acuity, a mutual insurance company (“Acuity”), and Joyce Jackman & Bell, LLC (“JJB”), concerning a fire that occurred on September 12, 2022, at 1124 Saint Ann Street in Scranton, Pennsylvania (the “Scranton Property”).

According to Plaintiff’s expert witness, James Stevenson, JJB breached its professional duty of care by failing to procure the correct policy for John Gianacopoulos and by failing to explain the differences in coverage between a homeowners’ insurance policy and a dwelling fire insurance policy.

JJB has moved to exclude Stevenson’s expert report and testimony, arguing that they are inadmissible because it lacked the requisite reliability and application to the specific facts of this case in violation of Rule 702.

Insurance Expert Witness

James W. Stevenson is an underwriter, consultant, and broker with over thirty years of experience in the insurance field.

Want to know more about the challenges James Stevenson has faced? Get the full details with our Challenge Study report.

Discussion by the Court

Stevenson’s opinion is supported by his “education, training, experience and expertise in the property and liability insurance industry over the past [thirty-seven] years,” and, moreover, his opinion concerned facts pertinent to this case. He stated in his report that JJB should have been aware of the Plaintiff’s changed residence and that “once [JJB] was made aware that John Gianacopoulos had purchased a new home and was making it his residence, [JJB] was or should have been aware that the [Scranton Property] was no longer [his] residence.” As a result, the Court found that Stevenson has satisfied both contested prongs of Rule 702.

He further opined that JJB breached its duty by failing to procure the correct policy for the Plaintiff’s Scranton Property—a dwelling fire insurance policy—that would have provided property coverage for the fire loss at the property. Stevenson also explained in his deposition that “it’s up to the agent, being the trained expert they are in the insurance industry, to recommend or explain the coverages available and the policies available to the insured/prospect,” and that JJB had an obligation to advise the Plaintiff in this action because “[y]ou can’t have two homeowners’ policies with primary residences.”

Held

The Court denied JJB’s motion to exclude the testimony of James Stevenson.

Key Takeaway

The expert’s testimony must be relevant to the purpose of the case and must assist the trier of fact. Stevenson’s opinion, as expressed in his report and at his deposition, created a genuine dispute of material fact as to the duty that JJB owed the Plaintiff, which must be determined by the factfinder.

Case Details:

Case Caption:Gianacopoulos V. Joyce Jackman & Bell, LLC
Docket Number:3:23cv992
Court Name:United States District Court, Pennsylvania Middle
Order Date:February 13, 2026

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *