"The workshop was really informative! We learned so much from your panelists, and plan to use all this good info as we move forward. Thanks so much!"
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.
Does Allstate’s 180 day policy language violate New York’s Standard Fire Policy?
Is Allstate’s 180 day policy language ambiguous? UP argued that it is not reasonable to uphold language in... Read more
UP weighed in along with three other organizations to advance the position that where there is a conflict between plan documents, the one that favors plan participants should control, or, in the... Read more
Whether an insurance company's filing of an "interpleader" in a multiple claimant case protects the insured’s interests and fulfills the carrier’s duty of good faith. UP's brief was written pro... Read more
Whether an excess insurance carrier’s denial of coverage to a policyholder who settles with its primary insurance company for an amount below the primary insurance company’s limits violates the... Read more
Issues involve: (1) whether insurance company must be prejudiced in order for there to be material breach of the cooperation clause such that it bars coverage and (2) whether the insurance company... Read more
Whether an employer is deprived of coverage for its vicarious liability for the act of an employee if the employee acted intentionally. The Court of Appeal held that because the employee’s act was... Read more
The Court held that the standard “contractual liability” exclusion found in the CGL policy essentially is a “breach of contract” exclusion applicable anytime a liability defense, e.g., statute of... Read more
A claim is potentially covered, thus triggering the duty to defend, when there is uncertainty as to coverage. Once this uncertainty is eliminated through a declaratory judgment action it does not... Read more