If the insurance defendants continue to decline coverage for the judgment, the plaintiff claimed Officer Cyr would go bankrupt if he paid it himself. (Credit: Daniel/Adobe Stock)
A jury held that a police officer used excessive force against a plaintiff. Now, the plaintiff is trying to recover the $132,175 judgment from the police department's insurance company.
In 2020, the plaintiff Mark Wingster filed a lawsuit in Connecticut District Court against Daniel Cyr, an officer in the Torrington, Connecticut police department. While Wingster was driving down the highway, Cyr allegedly forced him off the road and assaulted the plaintiff by kicking and hitting him with other officers. At the time of the excessive force incident, the jury held Cyr was "acting under color of state law."
The jury awarded $20,000 in compensatory damages and $80,000 in punitive damages against Cyr. The court also awarded the plaintiff $32,175 in attorney fees and costs.
In the current action, Wingster sued Cyr and the town insurance company, Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management, and Cyr's homeowner's insurance, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.
Counsel for Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management Agency, Liza M. Shetty and Mark A. Milano of Milano & Wanut, did not respond to a request for comment. Liberty Mutual is represented by Kerry R. Callahan of Updike, Kelly & Spellacy. Callahan did not respond to a request for comment.
This complaint was surfaced on Law.com Radar.
Wingster claimed Cyr "refused" to pay the judgment, and the insurance defendants have "intentionally disregarded" their requirement to compensate the plaintiff. According to the complaint, Connecticut Interlocal Risk Management must cover the judgment under its Law Enforcement Liability Policy. In addition, Liberty Mutual is allegedly seeking to escape "the obligation to indemnify [Cyr] for a significant obligation covered by its homeowner's insurance policy."
If the insurance defendants continue to decline coverage for the judgment, the plaintiff claimed Cyr would go bankrupt if he paid it himself.
Under the causes of action, Wingster alleged bad faith denial of insurance claim against both companies. The companies purportedly acted in a bad faith manner when they delayed coverage using invalid coverage defenses, denied coverage for conduct under the color of law, used narrow interpretations of policy terms and lacked care for the plaintiff's interests.
"As a further proximate result [of] defendant’s bad faith conduct, plaintiff has been compelled to retain legal counsel to obtain the coverage benefits due under the policy," the complaint said. "Therefore, defendants are liable to plaintiffs for those attorney fees, witness fees, and costs of litigation reasonably necessary and incurred by plaintiffs in order to obtain the benefits of the policy."
The plaintiff further stated he is entitled to damages such as interest on withheld payments.
The insurance companies were also accused of breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, while Cyr allegedly committed a bad faith denial of judgment.
Counsel for Wingster, Josephine S. Miller, did not respond to a request for comment.
This action was surfaced by Law.com Radar, which delivers AI-enhanced case summaries and daily case reports from more than 2,200 state and federal courts. Click here to get started and be first to act on opportunities in your region, practice area or client sector.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.