Alfred DeGennaro v. American Bankers Insurance Company of Florida, et al.

Whether the Third Circuit Court of Appeals improperly stated the law when it read the heightened pleading requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b) for notification of fraudulent conduct as applying to pleading the actual monetary value of the resulting damages and can that pleading burden be reconciled with: (1) the conflicting ruling of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Grubbs v. Kanneganti; and (2) the United States Supreme Court's decision in Story v Parchment keeping the burden of the uncertainty of damages on the Defendant. Whether a regulation focal to Plaintiffs case, plead factually in the complaint and fully briefed before both the District Court and Appellate Court, can be ignored on appeal because there was no citation to that regulation in the complaint, given the recent Supreme Court's pleading standards in Skinner v. Switzer, Whether the Court of Appeals improperly stated the law in denying the Plaintiff a private right of action, recognized by the highest courts in New Jersey, because the text of N.J.A.C. 11:1- 22.5(b)(2) only denies an insured the right to enforce those penalties "set forth in this subsection" Whether the monetary value attributed to damages for carrying risk, should be extended as a remedy to consumers in insurance contracts when