An insurer can no longer claim its lack of notice of a lawsuit against its insured excuses it for failing to settle the suit after the Georgia Supreme Court’s recent decision in GEICO Indemnity Co. v. Whiteside, Case No. S21Q0227 …
Waiver, estoppel and forfeiture are doctrines on which insureds often rely to try to create coverage outside the terms of the insurance policy. Insureds will often assert that they are entitled to such extra-contractual coverage based entirely on how the …
Avoid Creating Coverage By Estoppel, Waiver & Forfeiture: California Read more »
On March 8, 2021 the California Court of Appeal, reversing a $10 million verdict against Farmers, found that a jury must specifically find unreasonable acts by an insurer to support a “failure to settle” bad faith finding. Pinto v. Farmers …
Illinois does not recognize bad faith as an independent tort. In the first-party context, bad faith is a purely statutory construct which hinges upon whether an insurer’s conduct was “vexatious and unreasonable.” Section 155 of the Illinois Insurance Code (215 …
Tips for Avoiding First-Party “Bad Faith” in Illinois Read more »
In two recent cases, the courts showed substantial deference to patients’ treating physicians in determining the reasonableness of medical treatment. This deference appears to reflect a reluctance of courts to decide what healthcare is appropriate for a patient. In Peterson …
Recent Bad Faith Cases Regarding Reasonableness of Medical Treatment Read more »
The key issue in insurance bad faith litigation is whether the claims professional reasonably handled the claim. Throughout the claims-handling process, the claims professional should constantly ask him-or-herself whether the investigation is sufficient to support a coverage determination and how …
In Texas, and as a general rule, only the four corners of the policy and the four corners of the petition against the insured are relevant in deciding whether the duty to defend applies. Richards v. State Farm Lloyds, ___S.W.3d …
In Part I of this series, we explored the differences between institutional and non-institutional bad faith. For claims of institutional bad faith, plaintiffs often attempt to demonstrate a pattern and practice by offering evidence of claims of other policyholders. Unlike …
Defending Institutional Bad Faith Claims, Part III – Proof by Other Claims Read more »
In Part I of this series, we discussed institutional bad faith and best practices for insurers to minimize the risk of these costly and intrusive lawsuits. In Part II, we will focus on cutting discovery off at the pleadings—by narrowing …
Defending Institutional Bad Faith Claims, Part II – Focusing on Plausibility Read more »
Broadly speaking, there are two types of bad faith claims that may be alleged against an insurance company—traditional or non-institutional bad faith, and institutional bad faith. For the former, a policyholder would seek to hold an insurer liable for its …
Defending Institutional Bad Faith Claims, Part I – A Primer on Institutional Bad Faith Read more »