Court: Insurer Must Defend Teen Accused of Cyberbullying Classmate Before Her Suicide
A federal district court in Pennsylvania has ruled that an insurance company must provide a defense to a teenage boy who was sued by the parents of a girl who committed suicide after he allegedly cyberbullied her.
December 13, 2018 at 10:26 AM
5 minute read
This story is reprinted with permission from FC&S Legal, the industry's only comprehensive digital resource designed for insurance coverage law professionals. Visit the website to subscribe.
A federal district court in Pennsylvania has ruled that an insurance company must provide a defense to a teenage boy who was sued by the parents of a girl who committed suicide after he allegedly cyberbullied her.
|The Case
As alleged in a lawsuit filed in a Pennsylvania state court by Julia Morath's parents against Zach Trimbur, a high school student, and his parents, before April 7, 2017, Trimbur “harass[ed], bull[ied], and/or cyberbull[ied]” an unnamed classmate, Jane Doe.
The state court lawsuit alleged that high school administrators informed Trimbur's parents of their son's behavior, and they “assured” the administrators they would “supervise, discipline, and/or control their son.” They “ensure[d]” the school administrators their son “would not engage in similar behavior in the future.”
Despite those assurances, the state court lawsuit alleged, Trimbur continued his conduct. At some unspecified time “in the days before April 7, 2017,” he texted his classmate, Morath:
“That's ok with me, so go back to your hellhole of a home and sit in your room and let some more guys come and penetrate you as you desperately reach out for any attention you can grasp because you are afraid of everything and anything. No one cares about your health issues and how you are an anorexic, bulimic, receding hairline c— who goes home and cuts herself every night to cope with the fact that guys will only ever do anything with you due to the fact that you are easy and that your own mother doesn't even love you. So then you have to go back to a hospital with all of your other freak show disabled people that don't know how to stick a piece of food in there [sic] mouths. You claim to cut people off but no one cares about you enough to give a shit. Also you should probably work better on covering up your scars located on EVERYWHERE on your fucking body because they make you look more repulsive than you already do. Best regards,”
The state court lawsuit alleged that Morath felt “distraught with severe mental and emotional pain and suffering.” She showed the text message to her parents, who then informed school administrators of the message on April 6, 2017. The high school suspended Trimbur the same day, but he allegedly “continued to harass, bully, and/or cyberbully” Morath after his suspension.
Morath died by suicide April 7, 2017.
The homeowners' insurance company for Trimbur and his parents, State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., sought a declaratory judgment that it had no duty to provide a defense to Trimbur.
State Farm contended that “the alleged bodily injury sustained by Julia Morath did not arise from an 'occurrence'”—that is, an “accident”—triggering coverage under the policy, because Trimbur's “harassment, bullying and cyber-bull[y]ing [was] inherently non-accidental in nature.”
Trimbur countered that Pennsylvania law required that the court consider the foreseeability of the injury from his perspective, and that although he could not dispute sending the text message, Morath's death by suicide constituted an extraordinary intervening event far beyond anything contemplated in the text message and unforeseeable as to him.
The parties moved for judgment in their favor.
|The District Court's Decision
The district court granted Trimbur's motion for judgment on the pleadings.
In its decision, the district court explained that the Moraths, in their individual capacities and as co-administrators of their daughter's estate, sued Trimbur for negligence, as well as wrongful death and survival. They alleged that Trimbur's conduct was “unreasonable, negligent, grossly negligent, careless, and reckless and [he] intentionally breached his duty to exercise due care generally” and in various particular respects, including, among other things, his “fail[ure] to use his cell phone in a reasonable manner” and acting “with a reckless disregard to Julia Morath's health and safety.”
The district court decided that State Farm had to defend Trimbur because the negligence claim against him fell within the scope of the “occurrence” language in the State Farm insurance policy.
According to the district court, viewing the events from Trimbur's perspective, it could “not conclusively find” that death by suicide was “foreseeable from his cyberbullying” because suicide constituted an independent intervening act “so extraordinary as not to have been reasonably foreseeable by the original tortfeasor.”
The district court concluded that, from Trimbur's perspective, his classmate's death by suicide was “an accident,” and the Moraths' negligence claim fell within the scope of the State Farm policy.
The case is State Farm Fire and Casualty v. Motta.
Steven A. Meyerowitz is the director of FC&S Legal, editor-in-chief of the Insurance Coverage Law Report and founder and president of Meyerowitz Communications Inc.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllThe Rise of AI and Other Changes Abound in the Law: A 2024 Year-End Review
18 minute readMatt's Corner: Contributory Negligence Can Be a Bar to Legal Malpractice Recovery
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Bucking Industry Trend, Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Class of Partners in Firm History
- 2US Judge Throws Out Sale of Infowars to The Onion. But That's Not the End of the Road for Sandy Hook Families
- 3‘Really Deflating’: Judges React to Biden Threat to Veto New Judgeships Bill
- 43 Incidents Lead to Charges Against the Alexander Brothers; Cousin Remains at Large
- 5Sidley Austin Elects Biggest Combined Class of Partners and Counsel in Firm History
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250