Facts

On July 1, 2009, radiologist Steven Hake sued Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., which was his disability insurer, in relation to his disability policy. On June 23, 2010, Mass. Mutual moved to dismiss the complaint, alleging that he had failed to comply with a discovery order issued by the district court. Mass Mutual also moved for summary judgment as to the contract claim on Jan. 5, 2011.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Plaintiff alleged claims for breach of contract, declaratory relief, tortious breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of Nevada Revised Statutes Section 686A.310.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Mass Mutual argued that it was entitled to terminating sanctions as to plaintiff's extra contractual claims based upon plaintiff's dilatory tactics during discovery. Mass Mutual also argued that because plaintiff continued to perform the same duties of his occupation before his date of disability as he did after, although for different employers, that he was not totally disabled under the terms of the insurance policy.

Result

The court dismissed plaintiff's claims for tortious breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of Nevada Revised Statutes Section 686A.310, because Mass Mutual was unable to conduct discovery on these claims. The court granted Mass Mutual summary judgment on Aug. 8, 2011. As to the breach of contract claim, the court granted Mass Mutual's summary judgment on Aug. 8, 2011. Hake v. Mass. Mut. Life Ins. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 87584 (D. Nev. August 8, 2011).