FEDERAL COURT CHALLENGES PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY TO PROVIDE “FACTUAL SUPPORT” FOR THEIR PLEADINGS OR FACE SANCTIONS - REPEAT VALLEY HAIL LITIGANTS LOSE AGAIN IN APPRAISAL BATTLE

Recently, federal Judge Micaela Alvarez once again granted summary judgment in favor of State Farm against repeat litigants Mark and Kelly Dizdar.  The Dizdars, represented by the Mostyn Law Firm, filed at least eight separate lawsuits^[1] against State Farm  making similar allegations regarding wind and hail damage to properties the Dizdars owned in Hidalgo County. In Dizdar v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 7:14-CV-514, 2016 WL 1449248 (S. D. Tex. Apr. 13, 2016) (slip opinion) Judge Alvarez granted summary judgment in State Farm’s favor for the fourth time, holding that “due to State Farm’s compliance with the appraisal provision, Plaintiffs are estopped from asserting a breach of contract claim as a matter of law” and striking down their extra-contractual claims as well. We reported on prior rulings against the Dizdars on February 19, 2016 and March 11, 2016.

This time, in addition to granting summary judgment and dismissing all claims, Judge Alvarez explicitly noted that the Dizdars’ pleadings were “factually unsupported” and observed she had previously reminded their counsel of their obligation to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (essentially that the claims have a legal basis, are not frivolous or filed for the purpose of harassment, etc.) in filing pleadings.  She ordered Mr. Mostyn to appear for a show-cause hearing regarding possible sanctions under Rule 11.

[1]  Other similarly styled suits filed by the Dizdars include No. 7:14-CV-402 (reported at 2016 WL 427501); No. 7:14-CV- 445; No 7:14-CV-449, No. 7:14-CV-509, No. 7:14-CV-517, No. 7:14-CV-664 (reported at 2016 WL 695777, and No. 13-14-00391-CV (reported at 2014 WL 4402067).