“I don't know how we would have found answers or how to begin if they had not coached us through the process.”
About the Amicus Library
Welcome to the Amicus Project library. Here you will find copies of the briefs we have filed on behalf of insurance consumers. UP brings a unique consumer voice before courts confronting insurance issues - reminding judges that there are real people who have suffered real loss behind the case captions.
At the time UP published its 2011 report entitled: "Twenty Years Protecting, Defending and Advancing Policyholders Rights" we had filed 300+ briefs since our founding in 1991. UP's Amicus Project output has grown exponentially and more and more courts are hearing our voice and adopting our arguments.
UP's Amicus Project is made possible by the hundreds of dedicated policyholder attorneys who generously volunteer their time to write our briefs. Click here to view the attorneys who make up our Amicus Project Team.
To request that UP weigh in on a case, please complete this Request Form.
In a recent decision, the Alabama Supreme Court left the ranks of the outlier courts, holding that faulty workmanship can be a covered “occurrence” under Commercial General Liability... Read more
Under Montana law, if a carrier refuses to defend under a reservation of rights, it does so at its own peril and is liable for all damages resulting from an unjustified breach of the duty to... Read more
Insurers owe special duties to policyholders, including the duty to communicate policy requirements and settle claims fairly. Policyholders have a reasonable expectation that their policy benefits... Read more
UP weighed in to prevent insurers from abusing the surplus lines marketplace to circumvent consumer protections and sell policies to Florida consumers that the former FL Insurance... Read more
In an issue of first impression, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court considered whether an insured can recover reasonable settlement amounts if the insurer refuses to consent to settlement, in cases... Read more
The notice-prejudice rule supports insurance consumers by avoiding disproportionate forfeiture when an insured fails to report a claim within the time stated in the policy. UP argued in its brief... Read more
Some insurers play fast and loose with the phrase “replacement cost” to their customers’ detriment. They advertise “replacement cost” (RC) coverage as being superior to “actual cash value” (... Read more
UP argued in its brief that Allstate’s denial of a claim was improper because it relied on an ambiguous policy definition of an the ambiguity of “occurrence”. Allstate denied a claim for coverage... Read more
UP urged the California Supreme Court to follow the clear precedent that an insurer’s “duty to defend” extends to both direct and indirect, express and implied, disparagement claims. UP urged the... Read more
UP argued that an insurer’s “duty to defend” is its most basic responsibility under the insurance contact and a failure to do is tantamount to a material breach of contract. As such, the... Read more