Arizona
Scot and Joanna Sobieski v. American Family Ins. Co. et al
Year: 2017
Court: Arizona Supreme Court
Case Number: CV-16-0253-PR
Issue:
  • Punitive Damages
State:
  • Arizona

In a brief supporting a petition for review, UP argued that when a reviewing court disregards a jury’s finding that punitive damages were warranted in an insurance bad faith case, it is harmful to consumers. When an insurance company acts in bad faith, the discretion…
James Duepner v. GEICO Casualty Co.
Year: 2017
Court: Arizona Supreme Court
Case Number: CV-17-0216-PR
Issue:
  • Bad Faith
State:
  • Arizona

Punitive damages are an essential check on abuse and overreaching by insurance companies making coverage decisions and adjusting claims. There is a vast gulf between the power and wealth of insurance companies and their insurance consumers. It is true that many insurers act responsibly in…
Karen Cosgrove v. National Fire and Marine Ins. Co.
Year: 2017
Court: U.S. District Court, District of Arizona
Case Number: CV-14-02229-PHX-HRH
Issue:
  • Estoppel
State:
  • Arizona

When an insurance company obtains confidential information from coverage counsel for the insured, it is estopped from asserting coverage defenses based upon the improperly obtained information. In the instant case, the District Court held as much, but the order was vacated and records were sealed.…
Apollo Education Group, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburg, PA
Year: 2019
Court: Supreme Court of Arizona
Case Number: CV-19-0229-CQ
Issue:
  • Consent to Settle
State:
  • Arizona

In its brief, UP argues for the applicable standard to apply in Arizona when determining whether an insurer unreasonably withholds consent to an insured’s settlement with shareholders in a breach of contract under a policy where an insurer has no duty to defend. UP argues…
Cosgrove v. National Fire & Marine Insurance Company
Year: 2019
Court: United States District Court for the District of Arizona
Case Number: CV-14-02229-PHX-HRH
Issue:
State:
  • Arizona

In its memorandum, UP argues that the court’s partial summary judgment opinion must be unsealed unless the insurance company has a “compelling reason” to seal it, and no compelling reason exists here. The insurer first argues that if the opinion is unsealed, it could subject…