The policyholders’ land was insured under a title insurance policy they’d bought from TICOR. When the State of Hawaii filed a suit against them related to the land, they turned to TICOR for a defense, but it denied their claim. In an amicus brief drafted pro bono by Alan Van Etten of Deeley King Pang & Van Etten, LLP, UP argued in favor of the insurer’s duty to defend the Harts. The Hawaii Supreme Court agreed. It reversed a lower court ruling, concluded that TICOR had a duty to defend the Harts, and directed the District Court to enter judgment in their favor. The Hart’s attorney conveyed his thanks to UP; writing “United Policyholders’ amicus brief certainly highlighted for the Justices the importance of this case,” Christopher T. Goodin, Esq. of Cades Schutte LLP.
Charles Mitchell Hart and Lisa Marie Hart v. TICOR Title Insurance Company
Year
2011
Court
Hawaii Supreme Court
Case Number
SCWC-29467
Issue
- Duty to Defend
- Title Insurance
State
- Hawaii