PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Bad Faith / New York Court of Appeals Affirms GBL § 349 and § 350 Claims Must Have Widespread Effect on Consumers

New York Court of Appeals Affirms GBL § 349 and § 350 Claims Must Have Widespread Effect on Consumers

April 17, 2020 by Nora Valenza-Frost

Twenty-five years ago, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that a claim under General Business Law section 349 does not lie when the plaintiff alleges only “a private contract dispute over policy coverage and the processing of a claim which is unique to the[] parties, not conduct which affects the consuming public at large.” N.Y. Univ. v. Cont’l Ins. Co., 87 N.Y.2d 308, 321 (1995). Recently, the court was asked a different question: where an insurance contract, negotiated by sophisticated parties, is provided as one of several health insurance policies from which hundreds of thousands of employees and retirees can select, has the insurance company engaged in “consumer-oriented conduct” under sections 349 and 350? In Plavin v. Group Health Inc., the Court of Appeals answered: yes, the marketing actions of the health insurer are consumer-oriented, as they potentially affect hundreds of thousands of similarly situated consumers.

Sections 349 and 350 make unlawful any deceptive acts or practices or false advertising in the conduct of any business, trade or commerce or in the furnishing of any service in New York. During open enrollment, New York City employees and retirees could select only one of the 11 previously negotiated health insurance plans offered as part of their compensation and retirement packages. Although the underlying insurance contract was negotiated between the city and each health insurer, the insurers were able to market their health care plans directly to the employees and retirees. The appellant alleged that Group Health Inc.’s website contained “misleading benefit and coverage summaries” in its marketing materials during open enrollment, inducing consumers to select GHI’s health insurance plan and pay additional premiums for an allegedly worthless out-of-network rider.

Relying on past precedent, the court found that “by providing a choice of 11 options, the City created a health insurance marketplace for its approximately 600,000 employees and retirees, who were not direct parties to the contracts negotiated between the City and insurance vendors. GHI’s summary materials, prepared and edited solely by GHI, contained the only information provided to City employees and retirees when determining whether to select GHI’s Plan. Under these circumstances, we hold that the complaint adequately alleged consumer-oriented conduct.”

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

« Previous Article

Are COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims Appropriate for a Coverage Class Action?

Next Article »

Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina Join in Introducing Legislation That Would Force Insurers to Retroactively Cover COVID-19 Losses

About Nora Valenza-Frost

Nora Valenza-Frost is an of counsel at Carlton Fields in New York, New York. Connect with Nora on LinkedIn.

Related Articles

  1. New York Appellate Court Affirms Denial of Discovery Into Other Hurricane Sandy Claims
  2. Texas Appeals Court affirms Class Certification in Case Alleging Roofer Violated Insurance Code
  3. Florida Makes it Safer to Collect Subrogation Claims from Consumers
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person
  • Divided Ninth Circuit Finds Claimant’s Failure to Provide Medical Records Insulates Insurer From Bad Faith Failure to Settle
  • Eighth Circuit Finds No Coverage Under “Ensuing Loss” Provision Under Arkansas Law

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing