|
 |
NEW! 5/2/2008 11:24:04 AM EST The attempts to prevent insurance fraud are not entirely useless. As I report in this month's issue of Zalma's Insurance Fraud Letter, the following were convicted of variations of the crime of insurance fraud:
Convictions
===== Create an account or login to post comments. | Comments (0)
4/16/2008 11:57:02 AM EST In a move that will stick in the craw of the plaintiffs'' bar and stop most claims of bad-faith, improve the availability and price of insurance in Minnesota, and take the profit motive out of insurance claims, Minnesota lawmakers approved a bill limiting bad faith claims against insurers. The new statute passed on April 14, 2008: (1) Limits bad faith causes of action to first party claimants only, (2) requires a reasonable basis for denying a claim and (3) allows insurers to conduct fraud or fi Create an account or login to post comments. | Read Comments (6)
3/19/2008 11:24:28 AM EST I have to admit, I got such a kick out of John J. Pappas "From Beautiful Brazilians to Bear-Catchers" commentary that was featured in yesterday's issue of Insurance Bad Faith.
I am a journalist, not a lawyer; so I just write about litigation, and unfortunately miss out on experiencing the day-to-day gems that Pappas gets to witness first hand, such as his story of a burly father with bushy eyebrows (who claimed to once being a Greek Ambassador
3/7/2008 1:49:17 PM EST The Oregon Supreme Court yesterday affirmed that a $20 million punitive damages verdict against Farmers Insurance Company of Oregon is excessive but found that the case "fully justifies the highest permisible award, viz., an award tht is four times the amount of plaintiff's actual and potential harm."
The high court modified the Oregon Court of Appeals' opinion, which found for a three to one ratio. Comments (0)
2/25/2008 10:57:31 AM EST The standard for a first-party bad-faith claim in New York was perhaps significantly and permanently altered on February 19, 2008 with the Court of Appeals' decisions in Panasia Estates v. Hudson Insurance Company and Bi-Economy Market v. Harleysville respectively. Are extra-contractual damages far behind?
New York 's highest court did not recognize an independent tort cause of action for an insurer's alleged failure to perform its contractual obligations under an insurance contract. Roc Comments (0)
2/5/2008 2:33:34 PM EST U.S. Magistrate Judge James P. Donohue of the District Court of the Western District of Washington on Feb. 1 denied HSS Enterprises' motion to file an amended complaint, finding that Washington's Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA) is not retroactive.
HSS Enterprises sued AMCO Insurance Co. in the King County Superior Court for breach of contract, bad faith and violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act on Sept. 15, 2006. AMCO removed the case to the District Court. Create an account or login to post comments. | Comments (0)
1/30/2008 11:02:37 AM EST House Bill 2826 was introduced to the Tennessee House of Representatives on Jan. 16. If passed, the bill would require an attorney fees award if an insurer is found liable for bad faith failure to pay promptly or for violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act.
The bill would amend the Tennessee Codes Annotated Title 47, Chapter 18, Part 1; Title 56, Chapter 7; and Title 56, Chapter 8. The bill was introduced by Rep. David Shepard (D). Comments (0)
1/29/2008 2:32:29 PM EST Whether or not a lower-tiered excess insurer controlled a $29 million settlement process is a question of fact and not law, the Fifth District Illinois Appellate Court found Jan. 14, reversing and remanding a lower court's dismissal of American International Specialty Line Insurance Co.'s counterclaims against Great American Assurance Co. for bad faith and negligence in failing to settle an underlying claim by 13 injured boilermakers.
The panel also determined that the lower cou Comments (0)
12/5/2007 11:33:04 AM EST Yesterday, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California reached a verdict finding that American Re-Insurance Company breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing in refusing to reimburse American Motorists Insurance Co. for the $4.5 million it paid to settle an underlying claim.
Case summary to follow in the Dec. 11th issue of California Insurance and the Dec. 18th issue of Insurance Bad Faith.
Thoughts on the ve
11/27/2007 11:43:47 AM EST When I started covering Bad Faith Insurance, one of my assignments was to keep a closer eye (if you will) on Calif., Fla., Pa. and Texas, big states with a lot of bad faith cases. I still find that a good tip, and adhere to it to this day. However, with key bad faith legislation on the books in other states this past year, it seems that bad faith cases are pervading the country.
Which states are the ones to watch for key bad faith decisions in 2008?
11/6/2007 3:27:00 PM EST On Oct. 29, the Second District California Court of Appeals reversed a $197,939 economic damages award awarded to victims of the October 2003 California wildfires in Larry Stone, et al. v. Fidelity National Ins. Co., finding that the trial court erred by finding that the insureds were excused from the condition precedent of repairing the home before making a claim for replacment cost value.
In the Nov. 6 issue of Insurance Bad Faith, David Cox of Dickstein Shapiro noted that, i Comments (0)
10/4/2007 3:09:49 PM EST James Whittle, assistant general counsel to the American Insurance Association (AIA), discussed recent first and third party bad faith legislation at last week's Mealey's Bad Faith Litigation Conference.
Whittle talked about the "perfect storm" behind increased legislation in 2007 favoring policyholders, including hurricanes, years of tort reform, and political changes, specifically mentioning the changing of the guard at the Maryland Governor's mansion from Comments (0)
9/26/2007 5:58:54 PM EST "Bad Faith is sometimes about bad press," noted John Heintz, of Kelley Drye & Warren, during his "Appellate Assessment" seminar at yesterday's Mealey's Bad Faith Litigation Conference in Philadelphia.
Based in Washington, D.C., Heintz, in his lecture, brought up the question of whether a certain former president's homeowner's insurer had a duty to defend against a sexual harrassment claim.
"For them, it was more about bad pre Comments (0)
9/19/2007 3:10:27 PM EST The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Aug. 31 vacated a $10 million punitive damages award against Paul Revere Life Insurance Co. and its parent corporation, Unum Provident Corp.
In remanding for a new trial on punitive liability, the panel cited Philip Morris USA v. Williams in its finding that the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada erred in failing to instruct the jury that it could not punish the insurers for conduct that harmed only nonparties.
8/31/2007 3:30:38 PM EST If enacted, Pennsylvania's Senate Bill 745 would make the jury, and not the judge, the finder of the existence of bad faith, as well as the imposer of the appropriate statutory penalties.
In "Pennsylvania Bad Faith and the Road Not Taken" in the Sept. 4 issue of Insurance Bad Faith, commentator Steven C. Elliott, president of the Pennsylvania Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (PAMIC), opines that Senate Bill 745 would be a "wrong turn" Comments (0)
|