California
Firemans Fund Insurance Co. vs. City of Lodi, CA
Year: 2000
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 99-158902
Issue:
  • Post Claims Underwriting
State:
  • California

UP supports lower court decision and educates the court on insurance company tactics, post claims underwriting, etc.
Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Company, et al. vs. German Motors Corp. et al.
Year: 2006
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S158329
Issue:
  • Garage keepers policy; interpretation of "necessary or incidental"
State:
  • California

Letter brief requesting Petition for Review of Appellate decision. Under a garage keepers policy the phrase “necessary or incidental to” when evaluating scope of coverage is not supported by the broader interpretation contained in published opinions in other states or any published opinions in California.…
Fairbanks vs. Superior Court of California, Farmers New World Life Insurance Co., et al.
Year: 2007
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S157001
Issue:
  • Provisions of Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) should apply to insurance
State:
  • California

The provisions of the CLRA, Civil Code Section 1750, et seq. which prohibit “unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices” in the sale or lease of “goods or services” to consumers should apply to the sale of insurance.
Everett vs. State Farm General Insurance Company
Year: 2007
Court: California Court of Appeal, 4th District, Division 3
Case Number: E41807, 08 C.D.O.S. 5181
Issue:
  • Underinsurance
State:
  • California

Everett puts the onus on people who are not trained or competent to set policy limits. They and countless California homeowners who will be impacted by future wildfires and other natural disasters will be irreparably harmed by the continued publication of the Everett decision. Everett…
Engalla, Nida vs. The Permanente Medical Group, Inc.
Year: 1995
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: SO48811
Issue:
  • Arbitration
State:
  • California

When a contract of adhesion such as in a medical plan, contains an arbitration clause, the judiciary should be able o review the arbitration systems to determine their fairness and neutrality.
E.M.M.I. Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance Company
Year: 2001
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: B152740
Issue:
State:
  • California

Letter brief urging depublication of opinion adopting a narrow interpretation of coverage exclusion
The Downey Venture vs. LMI Insurance Company
Year: 1996
Court: California Court of Appeal, 2nd District, Division 3
Case Number:
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

Duty to defend; Torts
Griffin Dewatering vs. Northern Insurance Company of New York
Year: 2006
Court: California Court of Appeal, 4th District, Division 3
Case Number: G036896
Issue:
  • Brandt Fees
  • Genuine Dispute
State:
  • California

The genuine dispute doctrine should not apply when the insurer fails to investigate the insured’s claim thoroughly and bases its denial of a duty to defend on an insufficient investigation. Indeed, the genuine dispute doctrine has no application to the duty to defend in circumstances…
Foster-Gardner, Inc. vs. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA
Year: 1996
Court: Court of Appeals, 2nd Appellate Division, California
Case Number:
Issue:
  • Pollution Exclusion and Coverages
State:
  • California

PRP letters as suits; polluter’s exclusion
First American Title Insurance Company vs. Superior Court
Year: 2006
Court: California Court of Appeal, 2nd District, Division 3
Case Number: B194004 (2007)
Issue:
  • Discovery
State:
  • California

Request for depublication. Plaintiffs must be allowed pre-certification discovery in class actions arising out of insurance marketing and underwriting practices which often involve damages to policyholders that are too small to warrant individual action.
Hyundai Motor America vs. National Union Fire Insurance Company
Year: 2008
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 08-56527
Issue:
  • Duty to Defend
State:
  • California

The district court erroneously held that “advertising injury” insured under the CGL Policies at issue did not include “an injury caused by patent infringement even if that injury occurs during the course of an advertising activity.” The district court also failed to properly apply the…
Henkel Corporation vs. Lloyd’s of London
Year: 2002
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S0982427
Issue:
  • Commercial General Liability
State:
  • California

The fundamental characteristic of a general liability policy (CGL) providing coverage on the basis of an occurrence is that the policy never expires even after the policy expires. If the occurrence causing the damage took place in the policy period, coverage should be provided regardless…
Haworth, Randal vs. Superior Court of California
Year: 2008
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S165906
Issue:
  • Disclosure
State:
  • California

Neutral arbitrators, as well as sitting judges, should be required to disclose the facts and circumstances of a previous censure. The disclosure requirements for neutral arbitrators is critically important because it affects the ability of insurance consumers to obtain a fair and reasoned recovery of…
Hale vs. Provident Life & Accident Insurance Company
Year: 2002
Court: California Court of Appeal
Case Number: A092548, A092833
Issue:
  • Punitive Damages
State:
  • California

UP filed a request for publication of a decision supporting the insured’s claim for punitive damages and the application of Kransco (no comparative bad faith) to first party cases.
Hailey vs. California Physicians’ Service dba Blue Shield of California
Year: 2006
Court: California Court of Appeal, 4th District, Division 3
Case Number: GO35579
Issue:
  • Post Claims Underwriting
State:
  • California

Health and Safety Code section 1389.3 was designed to stop the practice of post-claims underwriting. Blue Shield should not be allowed to engage in post-claims underwriting and rescind its policy when it fails to sufficiently investigate and turns a blind eye to information it either…
LA Sound USA, Inc., et al vs. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company
Year: 2008
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S159342
Issue:
  • Rescission
State:
  • California

Letter brief supporting Petition for Review. The underlying decision improperly provides the insurer with a means to rescind policies and thereby avoid its policy obligations without first demonstrating that the insured intended to defraud the insurer. Furthermore, allowing rescission of the policy without restitution of…
Kwikset Corp. vs. S.C. (Benson),
Year: 2008
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S171845
Issue:
  • Standing
State:
  • California

Petition for Review: Under Kwikset the courts will not be open to challenge a falsely advertised product unless the plaintiff also alleges and proves a defect in the product, or that cheaper alternatives were available, or that the product was not “worth” what the consumer…
Kuwahara vs. 20th Century Insurance
Year: 1998
Court: California Supreme Court
Case Number: S083217
Issue:
  • Statute of Limitations
State:
  • California

The Statute of Limitations should not be invoked to deny coverage when the untimeliness of the claim was based on the insurance company’s inadequate investigation and misrepresentations regarding coverage.