Insurance Bad Faith A Year In Review For The Insurer: The Right To Be Wrong MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT
|
|
- Jade Austin
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT Insurance Bad Faith 2005 A Year In Review For The Insurer: The Right To Be Wrong by Thomas F. Segalla Esq. and Kevin T. Merriman, Esq. Goldberg Segalla LLP Buffalo, New York A commentary article reprinted from the February 7, 2006 issue of Mealey s Litigation Report: Insurance Bad Faith
2 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 Commentary 2005 A Year in Review For The Insurer: The Right To Be Wrong By Thomas F. Segalla and Kevin T. Merriman [Editor s Note: Thomas F. Segalla, one of the founding partners of Goldberg Segalla LLP, is a nationally recognized insurance expert whose active practice focuses on the defense and insurance coverage aspects of matters involving bad faith; construction site personal injury accidents; and toxic tort and environmental issues. He is the co-author of the renowned insurance law treatise Couch on Insurance 3d and he has been retained by numerous insurance carriers and policyholders as an insurance-related expert. Mr. Segalla can be reached at tsegalla@goldbergsegalla.com. Kevin T. Merriman concentrates his practice in insurance coverage and insurance defense litigation. He is a partner of Goldberg Segalla and represents insurance companies in a broad range of commercial and personal lines coverage issues, providing complex coverage opinions, underwriting advice and representing litigants in coverage disputes. His practice also includes insurance defense litigation, with an emphasis in toxic tort claims. Mr. Merriman can be reached at kmerriman@goldbergsegalla.com. This commentary, other than the quoted material, is the authors opinions; not their law firm s, and not Mealey s Publications. Copyright 2006 by the authors. Responses are welcome.] From the insurers perspective, the development of a significant body of case surrounding the fairly debatable standard was critically important to the defense of bad faith claims during the year of While various jurisdictions have developed slightly different definitions of this standard, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey best defined the standard in the case Enright v. Farm Family Casualty Insurance, F.Supp.2d (D.N.J. 2005); 2005 WL as follows: The fairly debatable standard is intended to allow insurers to deny coverage when they have a reasonable basis to believe that no coverage exists for a particular claim. Hudson Univ. Ltd., 98 F.Supp. at 341. Even if the insurer is later held to have been wrong, in such a situation, the insurer should have the right to litigate [the] claim and have the question of law or fact... decided before it in good faith is required to pay the claimant. Id. at 341. A plaintiff cannot sustain a claim for bad faith denial or postponement of coverage unless it can establish its substantive claim for coverage as a matter of law. Pickett, 131 N.J. at 474. In this paper, we provide the reader with citations from the various jurisdictions that have treated the fairly debatable standard in This will facilitate an understanding of the standard, and provide a ready reference to a current body of case law. Alaska 1. United States of America v. CNA Financial Corp., 381 F.Supp.2d 1088 (D. Alaska 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Rejected (Commercial General Liability Policy) The United States sued its insurer for failure to defend it in an action arising out of a personal injury action at a tribal alcohol abuse facility operated by the insured. The court found bad faith and rejected the fairly debatable standard because the insurer did not articulate in its denial letter the 1
3 Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith reason raised during the litigation for denying either coverage or a defense. Arizona 1. Verhulst v. General American Life Insurance Co., 2005 WL (D. Ariz. 2005) (Sept. 26, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Limited (Disability Policy) The insurer denied the insured s disability benefits for a period of time. In denying the insurer s motion for summary judgment, the court noted... even if the insurance company can show fair debatability and that its actions were objectively and subjectively reasonable in denying a claim, it still might be liable for bad faith based on its actions during the claims handling process. 2. Roehrs v. Minnesota Life Insurance Co., 228 F.R.D. 642 (D. Ariz. 2005) (Jun. 14, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Rejected (Disability Policy) This case involved the production of certain documents from the insurer s claim file. The court held that the insurer impliedly waived the attorney-client privilege as to certain documents. With respect to the fairly debatable standard, in footnote 4, the court references the impropriety of giving a fairly debatable instruction in a third-party bad faith case. Connecticut 1. McCulloch v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Co., 363 F.Supp.2d 169 (D. Conn. 2005)(Mar. 28, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Policy) The insurer terminated its insured s long-term disability benefits. Thereafter, the insured sued the insurer and reinsurer. The reinsurer sought dismissal of the bad faith claim. The court noted that... a plaintiff cannot recover for bad faith if the insurer denies a claim that is fairly debatable, i.e., if the insurer had some arguably justifiable reason for refusing to pay or terminating the claim. Idaho 1. Strong v. Unumprovident Corp., 383 F.Supp (D. Idaho 2005) (May 13, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Policy) The insured had submitted an application for disability benefits and instituted an action against the insurer for a denial of the benefits. The court dismissed the bad faith claim and noted that [t]o demonstrate bad faith under Idaho law, the insured must show: (1) the insurer intentionally and unreasonably denied payments of the claims; (2) the claim was not fairly debatable; (3) the insurer s denial was not the result of a good faith mistake; and (4) the resulting harm was not fully compensable by contract damages. Iowa 1. Etten v. U.S. Food Service, Inc., 2005 WL (N.D. Iowa 2005) (Nov. 14, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Workers Compensation Policy) In a claim involving an alleged bad faith refusal to pay workers compensation benefits, the court held that [a] reasonable basis for denial of the claim exists if the claim is fairly debatable. 2. Keystone Nursing Care Center v. Craddock, 705 N.W.2d 299 (Iowa 2005); (Nov. 8, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Workers Compensation Policy) In a split decision, the court held that there is not substantial evidence to support the commissioner s decision that the issue of industrial disability was not fairly debatable. The court also refused to award penalties against the employer. 3. Schuller v. Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Co., 2005 WL (N.D. Iowa 2005) (Sept. 15, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Policy) The claimant sued insurer contending there was no reasonable basis for it to delay or deny benefits. The court held that where an objectively reasonable basis for denial of a claim actually exists the insurer cannot be held liable for bad faith as a matter of law. The insurer has the right to debate claims that are fairly debatable. 4. Bellville v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co., 702 N.W.2d 468 (Iowa 2005); (Aug. 29, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Automobile Uninsured Motorist Policy) In an underinsured motorist case, the insured sued the insurer for bad faith, extra-contractual 2
4 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 and punitive damages. The court dismissed the bad faith claim because it held that it was fairly debatable when it is open to dispute on any logical basis. Stated another way, if reasonable minds can differ on the coveragedetermining facts or law, then the claim is fairly debatable. 5. Galbraith v. Allied Mutual Insurance Co., 698 N.W.2d 325 (Iowa 2005) (Jun. 24, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Automobile Uninsured Motorist Policy) The insured sued the insurer for a delay in payment of underinsured motorist benefits after an alleged oral agreement to settle the underlying tort claim. The court dismissed the bad faith and noted,... if the underlying third-party tort action is fairly debatable as to either the facts or the law, this circumstance provides reasonable basis for denial of underinsured-motorist benefits. 6. Cornwell v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 396 F.Supp.2d 1020 (S.D. Iowa 2005) (Jun. 2, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Automobile Uninsured Motorist Policy) A police officer instituted an action to recover UIM benefits from her insurer. The insurer denied the insured s benefits based on the Fireman s Rule and the previous benefits and settlements received by the insured. The court dismissed the bad faith claim because the insured s claim is fairly debatable on both grounds for denial. 7. Malecek v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 395 F.Supp.2d 767 *(N.D. Iowa 2005) (May 24, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Automobile Uninsured Motorist Policy) The insurer had denied UIM benefits and the insurer instituted an action for breach of contract and bad faith. The court held there were issues of fact as to whether the insurer s position was fairly debatable. Specifically, the court reviews the principles of bad faith under Iowa law. 8. Brcka v. The St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc., 366 F.Supp.2d 850 (S.D. Iowa 2005) (May 2, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Workers Compensation Policy The Workers Compensation Commission found that [c]laimant s claim for benefits was fairly debatable. The court applied issue preclusion and refused to relitigate the issue again. 9. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. v. Iowa District Court for Pottawattamic County, 695 N.W.2d 503 (Iowa App. 2005) (Jan. 13, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Mobile Home Policy) The insured s mobile home sustained property loss due to fire; however, it was undisputed that the fire was the result of arson. The insured filed a claim with its insurer and when the insurer refused payment, the insured instituted a bad faith action. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the insurer. Thereafter, the insurer sought sanctions, which were the subject of the action. The court awarded sanctions against the insureds and their attorney and considered the fairly debatable standard. Kentucky 1. Ehlschide v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Co., 2005 WL (Ky. App. 2005) (Dec. 14, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Cancer Policy) At issue in this case was the scope and amount of coverage for the insured s chemotherapy expenses. The court dismissed the bad faith claim holding [i]f the claim is fairly debatable, as to either the law or the facts, the insurer may debate it. There must be evidence of the insurer s evil motive, or reckless indifference to the rights of the insured. 2. Adams v. Westfield Insurance Co., 2005 WL (W.D. Ky. 2005) (Nov. 8, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Limited (Automobile Policy) In discussing the application of the Kentucky Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (KUC- SPA), to a property damage claim, the court noted, Although elements of a claim may be fairly debatable, an insurer must debate the matter fairly. Further, the court noted that an insurer... cannot lowball claims or delay claims hoping the insured will settle for less. 3. Bentley v. Bentley, 172 S.W.2d 375 (Ky. 2005) (Sept. 22, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard 3
5 Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith Applied (Automobile Policy) The court held that the insurer s refusal to settle the claim in a third-party context did not constitute bad faith because [i]n view of... existing law... that defense was not only fairly debatable, it had substantial merit. The insurer can challenge a claim and litigate it if the claim is debatable on the law or facts. 4. Shepherd v. Unumprovident Corp., 381 F.Supp.2d 608 (E.D. Ky. 2005) (Jun. 8, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Policy) The specific issue before the court was whether the testimony of the insured s expert pertaining to insurance industry standards was admissible. The court, citing Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), held that the insured s expert was qualified to testify. The court further noted that there was a jury question in the application of the fairly debatable standard. Nebraska 1. LeRette v. American Medical Security, Inc., 270 Neb. 545, 705 N.W.2d 41 (2005) (Oct. 28, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Health Insurance Policy) The court stated that [t]he question whether a claim is fairly debatable is appropriately decided by the court as a matter of law... and such a determination is based on information available to the insurance company at the time the demand is presented. Is there an arguable basis to deny the claim? 2. Stumbaugh v. Allstate Insurance Co., 2005 WL (Neb. App. 2005) (May 24, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Automobile Uninsured Motorist Policy) The insured instituted an action seeking coverage of a claim under an uninsured motorist provision in her policy and also for bad faith concerning the insurer s settlement of the claim. The court held that the insurer had a reasonable basis for its evaluation of the insured s claim and specifically that the value of the claim was fairly debatable. New Jersey 1. Enright v. Farm Family Casualty Insurance Co., 2005 WL (D.N.J. 2005) (Dec. 29, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Homeowner s Policy/Contractor s Advantage Policy) Citing to Pickett v. Lloyd s and Peerless Ins. Agency, Inc., 131 N.J. 457, 481 (1993), the court applied the fairly debatable standard setforth above and noted neither negligence nor mistake is sufficient to show bad faith. 2. Feit v. Great-West Life and Annuity Insurance Company, a Colorado Corporation, 2005 WL (D.N.J. 2005) (Oct. 18, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Life Insurance Policy) The court decided under the fairly debatable standard the insurer was entitled to summary judgment. In doing so, the court noted that the insured must show (1) absence of a reasonable basis for denying the benefits of the policy; and (2) the defendant s knowledge or reckless disregard of the lack of a reasonable basis for denying the claim. 3. Tri-State Armored Services, Inc. v. Subranni, 332 B.R. 690 (D.N.J. 2005) (Oct. 3, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Employee Dishonesty, Crime and Disappearance Policy) The bankruptcy trustee contended that the insurer s refusal to pay the trustee s claim constituted an unconscionable commercial practice under the Consumer Fraud Act. The court, citing to Pickett, applied the fairly debatable standard and dismissed the bad faith claim. The court also discussed the limitations of the fiduciary relationship between the insurer and insured. 4. Optica, Inc. v. Metro Public Adjustment Inc., 2005 WL (D.N.J.) (July 21, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Property Casualty Policy) In denying the insured s bad faith claim, the court noted that [i]n order to establish a claim for bad faith in the insurance context, a plaintiff must show two elements: (1) the insurer lacked a fairly debatable reason for its failure to pay a claim, and (2) the insurer knew or recklessly disregarded the lack of a reasonable basis to deny the claim. 5. NN&R, Inc. v. One Beacon Insurance Co., 2005 WL (D.N.J. 2005) (Jun. 28, 2005). 4
6 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Property and Liability Policy) The insurer denied a claim by the insured for damage to its policy that occurred when contiguous property was legally demolished. The court dismissed the bad faith claim noting, the mere denial of insurance benefits to which... plaintiffs believe they [are] entitled does not comprise an unconscionable commercial practice. The court also noted [i]n the context of a denial of insurance benefits, New Jersey applies that fairly debatable standard Cohen v. Unumprovident Corp., 2005 WL (D.N.J. 2005) (6/21/05). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Disability Policy) The insured sued the insurer alleging an improper termination of his disability benefits. Citing to the Pickett case, the court referenced the two-part inquiry need to evaluate the fairly debatable standard and noted [s]hould the insured be able to demonstrate the absence of a reasonable basis, in order to demonstrate bad faith, he or she must show that the insurer knew or recklessly disregarded the lack of a reasonable basis for denying the claim. 7. NN&R, Inc. v. One Beacon Insurance Group, 362 F.Supp.2d 514 (D.N.J. 2005) (Mar. 15, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Property Liability Policy) The court again citing the Pickett case noted: In the context of a denial of insurance benefits, New Jersey applies the fairly debatable standard [i]f a claim is fairly debatable, no liability in tort will arise. 8. American Hardware Mutual Insurance v. Harley Davidson of Trenton, Inc., 124 Fed. Appx. 107 (3d Cir. 2005) (Feb. 22, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Limited (Garage Liability Policy) The insurer instituted the declaratory judgment action seeking a declaration that it was not liable for the excess verdict above its insurance policy limits rendered against its insured. The court held that the insurer in this third-party bad faith case failed to act in good faith to settle the claim against the insured. The court held that the fairly debatable standard only supplies part of the equation and does not take into consideration the likelihood of an excess verdict. Contrast the Pickett case with Rova Farm, 323 A.2d 495 (1974) (recognizes a positive fiduciary duty. ). Rova, 323 A.2d at 498. Ohio 1. Keyser v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America, 2005 WL (S.D. Ohio 2005) (Sept. 12, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Insurance Policy) In a case involving an insurer s termination of benefits, the court held there were issues of fact as to whether reasonable minds could differ as to whether the insurer acted without reasonable justification. To grant a motion for summary judgment brought by an insurer on the issue of whether it lacked good faith, a court must find, after reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the insured, that the claim was fairly debatable and the refusal was premised on either status of the law at the time of the denial or the facts that gave rise to the claim. 2. Siemientkowski v. State Farm Insurance Co., 2005 WL (Ohio App. 8 Dist. 2005) (Aug. 18, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Homeowners Insurance Policy) The court rejected the homeowner s property damage claim and noted [w]here a claim is fairly debatable, the insurer is entitled to refuse the claim as long as such refusal is premised on a genuine dispute over either the status of the law at the time of the denial or the facts giving rise to the claim. 3. Abon, Ltd. v. Transcontinental Insurance Co., 2005 WL (Ohio App. 5 Dist. 2005) (Jun. 16, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Property Policy) The insured sustained a fire loss and the insurer denied the claim on various grounds. The court held that the... evidentiary materials indicate that the facts underlying the... loss were subject to fair debate, and [the insured] failed to present any evidence that [the insurer] had actual knowledge of a lack of a reasonable justification for refusing to pay the claim or that the insurer intentionally failed to determine whether there was any such justification. 5
7 Vol. 19, #19 February 7, 2006 MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT: Insurance Bad Faith 4. Garrett v. Ohio Farmers Insurance Co., 2005 WL (Ohio App. 11 Dist. 2005) (Feb. 4, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Automobile Policy) The insured instituted a bad faith and breach of contract action against the insurer and claims adjuster for a delay in paying the insured s claim for medical costs. The court utilizes a reasonable justification standard which is defined as: Reasonable justification does not exist where the insurer acts arbitrarily or capriciously. If an insurer determines that a claim is fairly debatable and the insurer s refusal of coverage is based on a genuine dispute over either the facts giving rise to the claim, or the status of the law at the time the claim arose, the insurer may refuse a claim. South Dakota 1. Culhane v. Western National Mutual Insurance Co., 704 N.W.2d 287, (SD ) (Sept. 7, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Automobile Policy) The policyholder sued the insurer claiming he was entitled to be compensated for the cost of repairs plus post-repair loss of market value. The court rejected the insured s claim and held that the insurer did not in bad faith. The court noted that an insurance company is entitled to challenge claims which are fairly debatable and will be found liable only where it has intentionally denied (or failed to process or pay) a claim without a reasonable basis. Utah 1. Machan v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America, 116 P.3d 342, 2005 UT 37 (Utah 2005) (Jun. 17, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Disability Policy) The insured instituted an action against the insurer for failure to pay a claim. The insurer paid the claim and moved for summary judgment. In discussing the bad faith claim, the court noted when an insured s claim is fairly debatable, the insurer is entitled to debate it and cannot be held to have breached the implied covenant if it chooses to do so. 2. Nelson v. Safeco Insurance Company of North American, 396 F.Supp.2d 1274 (D. Utah 2005) (Jun. 10, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Applied (Homeowners Policy) The insureds home was destroyed by fire and the insurer denied the claim, having concluded that the insureds intentionally set the fire and/or arranged to have the fire set. While the court held that the insurer failed to establish arson, the court held that the jury must decide if the denial was reasonable, or in other words, fairly debatable. Wisconsin 1. Travelers Insurance Co. v. Sconzert, 2006 WI App. 1; 2005 WL (Wis. App. 2005) (Nov. 9, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Limited (Workers Compensation Policy) The insurer denied the claim for permanent partial disability. The court, in holding that the delay in payment was inexcusable, stated [t]he fairly debatable test is an objective one, which asks whether a reasonable insurer under similar circumstances would have denied or delayed payment. 2. Menasha Corp. v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co., 361 F.Supp.2d 887 (E.D. Wisc. 2005) (Mar. 18, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Limited (Liability Policy) The insured instituted an action against the insurers alleged that the insurers breached their duties to defend it in an automobile parts manufacturer s lawsuit. They noted that an insurer has a duty to defend its insured when the complaint at least arguably asserts liability covered by the policy. The court notes that fairly debatable is an synonym for arguable. Wyoming 1. Cathcart v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 123 P.3d 579, 2005 WY 154 (Wyo. 2005) (Dec. 1, 2005). Fairly Debatable Standard Defined (Automobile Policy) Within the third-party bad faith context, the court noted that [t]he logical premise of the debatable... standard is that if a realistic question of liability does not exist, the insurance carrier is entitled to reasonably pursue that debate without exposure to a claim of violation of its duty of good faith and fair dealing. Gainsco Ins. Co. v. Amoco Production Co., 2002 WY 122 (Wyo
Discovery in Bad Faith Insurance Claims: State of the Law, Successful Strategies. Teleconference Program Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Discovery in Bad Faith Insurance Claims: State of the Law, Successful Strategies Teleconference Program Wednesday, March 29, 2006 Topic III A. Who is suing? Does it matter? 1. Whether suit is brought by
More informationCase: 2:04-cv-01110-JLG-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 06/13/05 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #: <pageid>
Case: 2:04-cv-01110-JLG-NMK Doc #: 33 Filed: 06/13/05 Page: 1 of 7 PAGEID #: IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION ALVIN E. WISEMAN, Plaintiff,
More informationRECENT DECISIONS IMPACTING BAD FAITH LAW IN NEW JERSEY
RECENT DECISIONS IMPACTING BAD FAITH LAW IN NEW JERSEY Kenneth D. Merin, Esq. Michael F. O'Neill, Esq. (908) 658-3800 Introduction New Jersey has long been recognized as an insured friendly jurisdiction
More informationPOST LITIGATION BAD FAITH THE POTENTIALLY ERODING DEFENSE OF THE INSURER. Bradley J. Vance, Esquire 1
POST LITIGATION BAD FAITH THE POTENTIALLY ERODING DEFENSE OF THE INSURER Bradley J. Vance, Esquire 1 For years Pennsylvania law has defined the bad faith cause of action based upon the terms of 42 Pa.C.S.A.
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
Thompson v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company et al Doc. 1 1 1 WO William U. Thompson, v. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Plaintiff, Property & Casualty Insurance
More informationFOLLOW THE SETTLEMENTS: BAD CLAIMS HANDLING EXCEPTION. Robert M. Hall
FOLLOW THE SETTLEMENTS: BAD CLAIMS HANDLING EXCEPTION By Robert M. Hall [Mr. Hall is a former law firm partner, a former insurance and reinsurance company executive and acts as an insurance consultant
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA MEMORANDUM. Ludwig. J. July 9, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA KATHLEEN M. KELLY : CIVIL ACTION : v. : : No. 09-1641 NATIONAL LIABILITY & FIRE : INSURANCE COMPANY : MEMORANDUM Ludwig. J.
More informationDISCOVERY IN BAD FAITH CASES
DISCOVERY IN BAD FAITH CASES Barbara A. O Brien A. The Tort of Bad Faith Bad faith is a separate tort from breach of contract. Anderson v. Continental Ins. Co., 85 Wis.2d 675, 686, 271 N.W.2d 368 (1978).
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT No. 06-3601 J.E. Jones Construction Co.; The Jones Company Custom Homes, Inc., Now known as REJ Custom Homes, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. Appeal from
More informationRECOGNIZING BAD FAITH CASES
RECOGNIZING BAD FAITH CASES Michael J. Mohlman Smith Coonrod Mohlman, LLC 7001 W. 79th Street Overland Park, KS 66204 Telephone: (913) 495-9965; Facsimile: (913) 894-1686 mike@smithcoonrod.com www.smithcoonrod.com
More informationCase 1:13-cv-00796-RPM Document 23 Filed 02/18/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9
Case 1:13-cv-00796-RPM Document 23 Filed 02/18/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9 Civil Action No. 13-cv-00796-RPM MICHAEL DAY KEENEY, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Senior
More informationMASSACHUSETTS INSURANCE LAW UPDATE
THE MCCORMACK FIRM, LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW MASSACHUSETTS INSURANCE LAW UPDATE Plaintiff Awarded in Excess of $1 Million For Insurer s Failure to Settle Automobile Liability Claim Within $20,000 Policy Limits
More informationTHE TEXAS PROMPT PAYMENT OF CLAIMS STATUTE AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE DUTY TO DEFEND
THE TEXAS PROMPT PAYMENT OF CLAIMS STATUTE AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE DUTY TO DEFEND January 8, 2008 THOMPSON COE I. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this article is to provide the insurance claims handler
More informationRecent Case Update. Insurance Stacking UIM Westra v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (Court of Appeals, 13 AP 48, June 18, 2013)
Recent Case Update VOL. XXII, NO. 2 Summer 2013 Insurance Summary Judgment Stacking UIM Saladin v. Progressive Northern Insurance Company (Court of Appeals, 12 AP 1649, June 4, 2013) On August 26, 2010,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. KWABENA WADEER and OFELIA WADEER, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS
More informationBAD FAITH INSTRUCTIONS Introduction
BAD FAITH INSTRUCTIONS Introduction These instructions are not materially changed from RAJI (CIVIL) 4th. The duty of good faith and fair dealing is implied in every contract. Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz.
More informationHow To Defend A Policy In Nevada
Insurance for In-House Counsel April 2014 Kevin Stolworthy, Esq. / Conor Flynn, Esq. / Matthew Stafford, Esq. Commercial General Liability Insurance ( CGL insurance ) Purpose of CGL Insurance CGL insurance
More informationWHAT IS IT, HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, AND WHERE IS IT GOING?
WHAT IS IT, HOW TO DEAL WITH IT, AND WHERE IS IT GOING? Moderator: Paul H. Leonard Policyholders view: Andrew M. Weiner Insurers view: Wallace C. Magathan, III First Party Hull Claims Third Party Passenger
More information57 of 62 DOCUMENTS. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA. 2006 Iowa App. LEXIS 172. March 1, 2006, Filed
Page 1 57 of 62 DOCUMENTS JAMES C. GARDNER, JR., Plaintiff-Appellant, vs. HEARTLAND EXPRESS, INC., and NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants-Appellees. No. 5-984 / 05-0037 COURT OF APPEALS
More informationIN COURT OF APPEALS. DECISION DATED AND FILED July 16, 2015. Appeal No. 2014AP157 DISTRICT IV DENNIS D. DUFOUR, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT-CROSS-RESPONDENT,
COURT OF APPEALS DECISION DATED AND FILED July 16, 2015 Diane M. Fremgen Clerk of Court of Appeals NOTICE This opinion is subject to further editing. If published, the official version will appear in the
More informationTHE RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT COUNSEL
THE RIGHT TO INDEPENDENT COUNSEL Julie A. Shehane Cooper & Scully, P.C. 900 Jackson Street, Suite 100 Telephone: 214-712 712-9546 Telecopy: 214-712 712-9540 Email: Julie.Shehane@cooperscully.com 2015 This
More informationBad Faith: Choice of Law Matters
Bad Faith: Choice of Law Matters Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge Insurance and Reinsurance Review - September 2010 Marc S. Voses Choice of law issues cannot be overlooked in insurance bad faith litigation,
More informationBAD FAITH LITIGATION. Presented By Douglas W. Lehrer Matthiesen, Wickert & Lehrer, S.C.
BAD FAITH LITIGATION Presented By Douglas W. Lehrer Matthiesen, Wickert & Lehrer, S.C. GoToWebinar Attendee Interface 1. Viewer Window 2. Control Panel 2 BAD FAITH LITIGATION Presented By Douglas W. Lehrer
More informationAPPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LACLEDE COUNTY. Honorable G. Stanley Moore, Circuit Judge
JOSEPH SMITH, ) ) Plaintiff-Respondent, ) ) vs. ) No. SD33341 ) MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, ) Filed: Jan. 23, 2015 ) Defendant-Appellant, ) ) and ANDREW SHAYATOVICH, ) ) Defendant-Respondent. ) APPEAL FROM
More informationInsurance Bad Faith. Statutory Bad-Faith Claims Following An Appraisal Award In Florida MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT
MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT Insurance Bad Faith Statutory Bad-Faith Claims Following An Appraisal Award In Florida by David H. Shaw, II, Esq. Butler Pappas Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP Tampa, Florida A commentary
More informationThe tort of bad faith failure to pay or investigate is still an often plead claim by
BAD FAITH VERDICTS The tort of bad faith failure to pay or investigate is still an often plead claim by the insured. Recent case law relies primarily on court precedent when determining whether the insured
More informationBAD FAITH LAW IN INDIANA
BAD FAITH LAW IN INDIANA CINCINNATI, OH COLUMBUS, OH DETROIT, MI FT. MITCHELL, KY ORLANDO, FL SARASOTA, FL www.smithrolfes.com 2012 I. OVERVIEW OF INDIANA BAD FAITH LAW Indiana recognizes a common-law
More informationCreative Methods Used To Set-Up Bad Faith Claims Use Of Multiple Coverage Demands
MEALEY S TM LITIGATION REPORT Insurance Bad Faith Creative Methods Used To Set-Up Bad Faith Claims Use Of Multiple Coverage Demands by David A. Mercer, Esq. Butler Pappas Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP A commentary
More informationCOURT ORDER STANDARD OF REVIEW STATEMENT OF FACTS
DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO 1437 Bannock Street Denver, CO 80202 Plaintiffs: JON C. COOK, an individual, and THE LUMBERYARDS DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C., a Colorado Limited Liability Company,
More informationHomeowner's insurance usually covers the following when they are due to accident or specific
Insurance TYPES OF POLICIES There are as many types of insurance policies as there are risks. During a disaster people may draw upon health, property and casualty and life insurance. These types of policies
More informationReinsurance. Piercing The Veil Of Reinsurance: Reinsurance Cut Throughs In Insurance Carrier Insolvencies MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT
MEALEY S LITIGATION REPORT Reinsurance Piercing The Veil Of Reinsurance: Reinsurance Cut Throughs In Insurance Carrier Insolvencies by Joseph C. Monahan, Esq. Saul Ewing LLP Philadelphia, PA A commentary
More informationCase 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Case 1:07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB Document 51 Filed 08/21/2008 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 07-cv-00389-MJW-BNB ERNA GANSER, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT
More informationILLINOIS LAW MANUAL CHAPTER XIII BAD FAITH AND EXTRA CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY. An insured or an assignee may recover extra-contractual damages from an
If you have questions or would like further information regarding Excess Judgments in Third Party Claims, please contact: Kevin Caplis 312-540-7630 kcaplis@querrey.com Result Oriented. Success Driven.
More informationCRS 10-3-1115 and -1116: Providing Remedies to First-Party Claimants by Erin Robson Kristofco
The Colorado Lawyer July 2010 Vol. 39, No. 7 [Page 69] 2010 The Colorado Lawyer and Colorado Bar Association. All Rights Reserved. Reprinted by permission. TORT AND INSURANCE LAW CRS 10-3-1115 and -1116:
More informationInsurance and Reinsurance Bad Faith Issues in Workers Compensation
Insurance and Reinsurance Bad Faith Issues in Workers Compensation N o other claim in insurance law is easier to threaten and more complex to defend against than Bad Faith. This paper discusses several
More information50 STATE DEDUCTIBLE REIMBURSEMENT CHART July 2007
MATTHIESEN, WICKERT & LEHRER, S.C. 1111 E. Sumner Street P.O. Box 270670 Hartford, WI 53027 (262) 673-7850 (262) 673-3766 (Fax) www.mwl-law.com 50 STATE DEDUCTIBLE REIMBURSEMENT CHART July 2007 STATE ALABAMA
More informationConflicts between the insurer and the insured can arise from the fact that the duty
AN ANALYSIS OF MARYLAND LAW REGARDING AN INSURER S DUTY TO DEFEND INCLUDING AN ANALYSIS OF THE TYPES OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST BETWEEN AN INSURED AND THE INSURER THAT MAY REQUIRE THE INSURER TO ACCEPT AND
More informationBAD FAITH IN WASHINGTON
BAD FAITH IN WASHINGTON By Steve Jensen,, and An insurer s bad faith can give rise to two related causes of action under Washington law: 1) a cause of action for bad faith sounding in tort, and 2) a cause
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION. Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 7:12-CV-148 (HL) ORDER
Case 7:12-cv-00148-HL Document 43 Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 11 CHRISTY LYNN WATFORD, IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION v. Plaintiff, Civil Action No.
More informationReed Armstrong Quarterly
Reed Armstrong Quarterly January 2009 http://www.reedarmstrong.com/default.asp Contributors: William B. Starnes II Tori L. Cox IN THIS ISSUE: Joint and Several Liability The Fault of Settled Tortfeasors
More informationDefendant. Pending before the Court is a motion (Dkt. No. 167) by defendant
Case 1:08-cv-00623-RJA-JJM Document 170 Filed 08/01/11 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK THE AUTOMOBILE INS. CO. OF HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT a/s/o Sherry Demrick, v. Plaintiff,
More informationMut. Ins. Co., 565 S.W.2d 716, 726 (Mo. App. 1978). Nor is the carrier entitled to proceeds from any claim its insured may have against anyone else.
Settlement and Mediation of UM and UIM Claims Michael J. Mohlman Smith Coonrod Mohlman, LLC 7001 W. 79th Street Overland Park, KS 66204 Telephone: (913) 495-9965; Facsimile: (913) 894-1686 mike@smithcoonrod.com
More information2012 WI APP 127 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION
2012 WI APP 127 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2011AP2875 Complete Title of Case: LOUIS G. ULLERICH AND MARIE ULLERICH, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, MICHAEL LEAVITT, SECRETARY OF THE
More informationCase 2:14-cv-00170-TS Document 45 Filed 05/11/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH
Case 2:14-cv-00170-TS Document 45 Filed 05/11/15 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, a Connecticut corporation, and
More informationTWENTY FORTH ANNUAL NORTHEAST SURETY AND FIDELITY CLAIMS CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 18th - 20th, 2013
TWENTY FORTH ANNUAL NORTHEAST SURETY AND FIDELITY CLAIMS CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 18th - 20th, 2013 LEGAL, PRACTICAL AND ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS CONFRONTING SURETIES AND FIDELITY CARRIERS IN RESPONDING TO DISCOVERY
More informationUNINSURED/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST CLAIMS AFTER BRAINARD. By C. Brooks Schuelke. Perlmutter & Schuelke, LLP th
UNINSURED/UNDERINSURED MOTORIST CLAIMS AFTER BRAINARD By C. Brooks Schuelke Perlmutter & Schuelke, LLP th 1717 W. 6 Street, Ste. 375 Austin, Texas 78703 (512)476-4944 www.civtrial.com brooks@civtrial.com
More informationUmbrella Vs State Farm - Both Sides of the Cake
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON June 20, 2001 Session SUSAN WEISS, ET AL. v. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, ET AL. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. 306126
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT
Filed 10/11/13 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT ED AGUILAR, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. B238853 (Los Angeles County
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION III PATRICK CORRIGAN, and ) No. ED99380 SEAN CORRIGAN, ) ) Appellants, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of St. Louis County vs. ) ) Honorable
More informationCase 3:07-cv-06160-MLC-JJH Document 80 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 15
Case 3:07-cv-06160-MLC-JJH Document 80 Filed 09/10/2008 Page 1 of 15 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY : LAUREN KAUFMAN, et al., : CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-6160 (MLC) :
More informationTHE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES. By Craig R. White
THE THREAT OF BAD FAITH LITIGATION ETHICAL HANDLING OF CLAIMS AND GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT PRACTICES By Craig R. White SKEDSVOLD & WHITE, LLC. 1050 Crown Pointe Parkway Suite 710 Atlanta, Georgia 30338 (770)
More informationHILTON HARRISBURG & TOWERS
UNFAIR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT PRACTICES (REGULATIONS) AND PRIVACY OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL INFORMATION (REGULATIONS) THEIR POTENTIAL IMPACT UPON BAD FAITH ACTIONS Presented By: Jay Barry Harris, Esquire Krista
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT. Israel : : v. : No. 3:98cv302(JBA) : State Farm Mutual Automobile : Insurance Company et al.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT Israel : : v. : No. 3:98cv302(JBA) : State Farm Mutual Automobile : Insurance Company et al. : Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. #82] After
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON March 11, 2015 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON March 11, 2015 Session JAY DANIEL, ET AL. v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Tipton County No. 7087 Joe H. Walker, III,
More informationEmployer Must Show Economic Injury to Successfully Invoke Key Employee Exception Under the Family and Medical Leave Act
June 1, 2011 I. EMPLOYMENT LAW Employer Must Show Economic Injury to Successfully Invoke Key Employee Exception Under the Family and Medical Leave Act In Johnson v. Resources for Human Development, Inc.,
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION LOUISE FOSTER Administrator of the : AUGUST TERM 2010 Estate of GEORGE FOSTER : and BARBARA DILL : vs.
More informationFORC QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF INSURANCE LAW AND REGULATION
The plaintiff in Schmidt filed suit against her employer, Personalized Audio Visual, Inc. ("PAV") and PAV s president, Dennis Smith ("Smith"). 684 A.2d at 68. Her Complaint alleged several causes of action
More informationILLINOIS LAW MANUAL CHAPTER XI INSURANCE COVERAGE AND DEFENSES. Uninsured motorist coverage protects the policyholder who is injured by an
If you have questions or would like further information regarding Uninsured-Underinsured Motorist Coverage, please contact: Jennifer Medenwald 312-540-7588 jmedenwald@querrey.com Result Oriented. Success
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS FARM BUREAU GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF MICHIGAN, UNPUBLISHED August 20, 2015 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant- Appellee, v No. 320710 Oakland Circuit Court YVONNE J. HARE,
More informationFILED May 21, 2015 Carla Bender 4 th District Appellate Court, IL
NOTICE This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2015 IL App (4th 140713-U NO. 4-14-0713
More informationTressler LLP, Copyright 2014 1
Tressler LLP, Copyright 2014 1 OBLIGATIONS FOR INSURERS TO PAY UNDISPUTED AMOUNTS OF CLAIM While it may be clear in the vast majority of states that insurers are required to pay the undisputed amounts
More information2012 WI APP 17 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION
2012 WI APP 17 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2011AP2 Petition for Review Filed Complete Title of Case: ARTISAN & TRUCKERS CASUALTY CO. AND PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA. Memorandum and Order
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CAROSELLA & FERRY, P.C., Plaintiff, v. TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. CIVIL ACTION NO. 00-2344 Memorandum and Order YOHN,
More informationCase 2:14-cv-02386-MVL-DEK Document 33 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:14-cv-02386-MVL-DEK Document 33 Filed 04/14/15 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA KIRSTEN D'JUVE CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO: 14-2386 AMERICAN MODERN HOME INSURANCE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH, PA. v. MEAD JOHNSON & COMPANY et al Doc. 324 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA EVANSVILLE DIVISION NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE KNOXVILLE DIVISION AMERICAN NATIONAL PROPERY AND CASUALTY COMPANY, v. Plaintiff, CAROL ANN STUTTE, et al., Defendant. No. 3:11-CV-219 MEMORANDUM
More informationIn the Court of Appeals of Georgia
SECOND DIVISION BARNES, P. J., MILLER and RAY, JJ. NOTICE: Motions for reconsideration must be physically received in our clerk s office within ten days of the date of decision to be deemed timely filed.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA. v. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Case 0:10-cv-00772-PAM-RLE Document 33 Filed 07/13/10 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Ideal Development Corporation, Mike Fogarty, J.W. Sullivan, George Riches, Warren Kleinsasser,
More informationAppellate Case: 12-1186 Document: 01019007431 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
Appellate Case: 12-1186 Document: 01019007431 Date Filed: 02/25/2013 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit LLOYD LAND; EILEEN LAND, Plaintiffs-Appellants.
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Certain Underwriters at Lloyd s London v. The Burlington Insurance Co., 2015 IL App (1st) 141408 Appellate Court Caption CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD S LONDON,
More informationUNINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE: THE CHALLENGE OF PUTTING THIRD-PARTY COVERAGE IN A FIRST-PARTY BOX
UNINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE: THE CHALLENGE OF PUTTING THIRD-PARTY COVERAGE IN A FIRST-PARTY BOX By: Catherine L. Hanna and Eric Peabody, Hanna & Plaut, LLP INTRODUCTION Most everyone knows Saul Steinberg
More informationAgents E&O Standard of Care Project
Agents E&O Standard of Care Project Survey Maryland To gain a deeper understanding of the differing agent duties and standard of care by state, the Big I Professional Liability Program and Swiss Re Corporate
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: NICHOLAS C. DEETS Hovde Dassow & Deets LLC Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: ROBERT A. DURHAM State Farm Litigation Counsel Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE
More informationIs Turnabout Fair Play? Insurers Seek Privileged Work Product From Policyholders Asserting Bad Faith Claims
MEALEY S TM LITIGATION REPORT Insurance Bad Faith Is Turnabout Fair Play? Insurers Seek Privileged Work Product From Policyholders Asserting Bad Faith Claims by Kristi Singleton and Richard Gallena Dickstein
More information2016 IL App (1st) 133918-U. No. 1-13-3918 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT
2016 IL App (1st) 133918-U No. 1-13-3918 SIXTH DIVISION May 6, 2016 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Huizenga v. Auto-Owners Insurance, 2014 IL App (3d) 120937 Appellate Court Caption DAVID HUIZENGA and BRENDA HUIZENGA, Plaintiffs- Appellants, v. AUTO-OWNERS INSURANCE,
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 94-11035. (Summary Calendar) GLEN R. GURLEY and JEAN E. GURLEY, AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANY,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 94-11035 (Summary Calendar) GLEN R. GURLEY and JEAN E. GURLEY, Plaintiffs-Appellants, versus AMERICAN STATES INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal
More informationCUNDIFF V. STATE FARM: ALLOWING DOUBLE RECOVERY UNDER UIM COVERAGE
CUNDIFF V. STATE FARM: ALLOWING DOUBLE RECOVERY UNDER UIM COVERAGE AND WORKERS COMPENSATION Melissa Healy INTRODUCTION In Cundiff v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., the Arizona Supreme Court
More informationINSURANCE COVERAGE HOW TO GET PAID. Henry Moore 512.477.1663 henry@moorelegal.net. Advanced Personal Injury - State Bar of Texas
INSURANCE COVERAGE HOW TO GET PAID Advanced Personal Injury - State Bar of Texas Henry Moore 512.477.1663 henry@moorelegal.net Auto Homeowners Commercial (CGL) Auto Auto covers: -The named insured -Family
More informationASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and
More informationPennsylvania Law on Advertising Injury
Pennsylvania Law on Advertising Injury Summary of Cases Atlantic Mutual Insurance v. Brotech Corp., 857 F. Supp. 423 (E.D. Pa. 1994), aff'd, 60 F.3d 813, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 15297 (3d Cir. May 12, 1995)
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS 444444444444 NO. 08-0073 444444444444 PROGRESSIVE COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. REGAN KELLEY, RESPONDENT 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
More informationCase 1:10-cv-02583-CCB Document 28 Filed 03/05/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
Case 1:10-cv-02583-CCB Document 28 Filed 03/05/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CRYSTAL WILLIAMS * * v. * Case No. CCB-10-2583 * TRAVCO INSURANCE CO. * ******
More informationBy Heather Howell Wright, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP. (Published July 24, 2013 in Insurance Coverage, by the ABA Section Of Litigation)
Tiara Condominium: The Demise of the Economic Loss Rule in Construction Defect Litigation and Impact on the Property Damage Requirement in a General Liability Policy By Heather Howell Wright, Bradley Arant
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Acuity v. Decker, 2015 IL App (2d) 150192 Appellate Court Caption ACUITY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DONALD DECKER, Defendant- Appellee (Groot Industries, Inc., Defendant).
More informationCase 2:07-cv-09711-EEF-SS Document 14 Filed 04/15/08 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
Case 2:07-cv-09711-EEF-SS Document 14 Filed 04/15/08 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA NATHAN GORDON * CIVIL ACTION * VERSUS * NUMBER: 07-9711 * FIDELITY NATIONAL INSURANCE
More informationANDREW S. AMER. As New York s highest court has held:
REINSURANCE ISSUES ARISING FROM MASS TORT SETTLEMENTS ANDREW S. AMER SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP MARCH 6, 2003 Mass tort claims continue to overwhelm the US court system and are now becoming more prevalent
More informationAnnuity Litigation - Class Certification and Summary of Insurance Loan
Annuity Marketplace ACLI 2011 Compliance and Legal Sections Annual Meeting Jason A. Walters jwalters@babc.com babc.com ALABAMA I DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA I MISSISSIPPI I NORTH CAROLINA I TENNESSEE Topics Class
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE, AT JACKSON. July 13, 1999 INTEGON INDEMNITY ) Shelby County Chancery Court
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE, AT JACKSON FILED July 13, 1999 INTEGON INDEMNITY Shelby County Chancery Court CORPORATION, No. 108770-1 R.D. Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk Plaintiff/Appellant.
More informationINSURANCE COVERAGE REVIEW: BAD FAITH UNDER NEW YORK LAW
INSURANCE COVERAGE REVIEW: BAD FAITH UNDER NEW YORK LAW L Abbate, Balkan, Colavita & Contini, L.L.P. MARCH 2010 INTRODUCTION The law of insurer bad faith differs dramatically among the various state jurisdictions.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS NO. 13-1006 IN RE ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, RELATOR ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS PER CURIAM Rafael Zuniga sued San Diego Tortilla (SDT) for personal injuries and then added
More informationCOURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, DEFENDANT.
2000 WI App 171 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 99-0776 Complete Title of Case: RONNIE PROPHET AND BADON PROPHET, V. PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, ENTERPRISE RENT-A-CAR COMPANY, INC.,
More informationFiscal Year 2014 Report to the Maryland General Assembly on Absence of Good Faith Cases Filed under 27-1001 of the Maryland Insurance Article MSAR #
Fiscal Year 2014 Report to the Maryland General Assembly on Absence of Good Faith Cases Filed under 27-1001 of the Maryland Insurance Article MSAR # 6587 Therese M. Goldsmith, Commissioner December 15,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS KIRK ALFORD, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED January 19, 2006 v No. 262441 Wayne Circuit Court ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, LC No. 03-338615-CK and Defendant-Appellee/Cross-
More informationThis opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014).
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2014). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A14-1489 Dominic Gemelli, Appellant, vs. Lindsey
More informationIN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion)
IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL (Memorandum Web Opinion) RATH V. STATE FARM MUT. AUTO. INS. CO. NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION
More informationCase 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Case 4:06-cv-00191 Document 12 Filed in TXSD on 05/25/06 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION BARBARA S. QUINN, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. H-06-00191
More informationHenkel Corp v. Hartford Accident
2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 3-27-2008 Henkel Corp v. Hartford Accident Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 06-4856 Follow
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND MARYLAND ACCOUNTING SERVICES, INC., et al. Plaintiffs, v. Case No. CCB-11-CV-00145 CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant. MEMORANDUM Plaintiffs
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION TWO FRANCIS GRAHAM, ) No. ED97421 ) Respondent, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court ) of St. Louis County vs. ) ) Honorable Steven H. Goldman STATE
More information