Washington
The Everett Clinic, PLLC v. Premera and Premerafirst, Inc
Year: 2023
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Case Number: 101683-2
Issue:
  • Health Plans
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus brief, United Policyholders takes a pro-consumer and pro-insurer position in the context of Washington’s longstanding public policy commitment to price competition in the healthcare marketplace. UP’s brief urges the Court to interpret a disputed agreement in a way that fosters competition and…
Hill and Stout PLLC v. Mutual of Enumclaw Insurance Company
Year: 2022
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Case Number: 100211-4
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus curiae brief, UP supports coverage for an insured’s business interruption losses related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. UP argues that under standard property insurance policies, “loss of” property occurs when property cannot be used for its intended purpose.
Seattle Tunnel Partners, et al. v. Great Lakes Reinsurance (UK) PLC, et al.
Year: 2022
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Case Number: 100168-1
Issue:
  • Physical Loss or Damage
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus curiae brief, UP provides the Court with case law and perspective on the genesis and historical interpretation of the key coverage “trigger” language used in standard property insurance policies.
The Everett Clinic, PLLC v. Premera and Premerafirst, Inc
Year: 2022
Court: Washington Court of Appeals Division 1
Case Number: 82687-5-I
Issue:
  • Health Plans
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus brief, United Policyholders takes a pro-consumer and pro-insurer position in the context of Washington’s longstanding public policy commitment to price competition in the healthcare marketplace. UP’s brief urges the Court to interpret a disputed agreement in a way that fosters competition and…
Preferred Contractors Ins. Co. v. Baker and Son Construction, et al.
Year: 2022
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Case Number: 100466-4
Issue:
  • Occurrence
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus brief, United Policyholders addresses the issue of “non-retroactive claims-made coverage,” a highly unusual and notorious type of insurance that ostensibly requires that both (1) the conduct giving rise to an insurance claim and (2) the insurance claim itself to occur during the…
ES Restaurant Group Inc. et al v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company et al
Year: 2022
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 21-35498
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus curiae brief, UP supports coverage for an insured’s business interruption losses related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. UP argues that decades of case law demonstrate what the insurance industry and policyholders have long known: that “all risks” insurance policies protect insureds against a…
First and Stewart Hotel Owner, LLC v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company
Year: 2021
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 21-35637
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Washington

In its amicus curiae brief, UP supports coverage for an insured’s business interruption losses related to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and COVID-19. UP’s brief provides the Court with 50 years of case law from the Ninth Circuit and across the country showing that the standard insuring language…
CLMS Management Services LP, et. al. v. Amwins Brokerage of Georgia LLC, et al.
Year: 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit
Case Number: 20-35428
Issue:
  • Arbitration
  • Mandatory arbitration
State:
  • Washington

In it brief, UP urges the Court to follow the Second Circuits lead in enforcing state anti-arbitration laws against foreign insurers just as they are enforceable against domestic insurers. As current Washington state law and Federal law (McCarran-Ferguson Act) stands, state anti-arbitration laws supersede acts…
Alpert v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC., et. al.
Year: 2021
Court: Supreme Court of Washington
Case Number: 99377-7
Issue:
  • Filed Rate Doctrine
State:
  • Washington

In its brief, UP explores the filed rate doctrines effect on illegal insurance practices. The filed rate doctrine potentially upholds illegal practices, such as mortgage kickbacks, unjust enrichment and racketeering by barring claims against insurers for insurance rates that have been previously approved by state…
HT-Seattle Owner, LLC. v. American Guarantee and Liability Ins. Co.
Year: 2021
Court: United States District Court Western District of Washington At Seattle
Case Number: Number: 2:21-cv-00048-BJR
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Washington

In its brief, UP sheds light on Zurich Edge’s pre-printed policy form that it issues to only its very large property policyholders and includes an endorsement that deletes “virus” from the Policy’s Contamination Exclusion (the “Virus Deletion Endorsement”). The “all-risk” policy provides coverage for COVID…
Vita Coffee, LLC v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company
Year: 2020
Court: United States District Court Western District of Washington at Seattle
Case Number: 2:20-cv-01079-JCC-DWC
Issue:
  • COVID-19
State:
  • Washington

In its brief, UP, along with the National Independent Venue Association and the Washington Hospitality Association, opposed a Motion to Dismiss a COVID-19 Business Interruption claim by Fireman’s Fund Insurance Company. UP focused on the following arguments: Washington rules of insurance contract interpretation do not…
Cook, Heidi Sue vs. American States Insurance Company
Year: 1996
Court: Washington State Supreme Court
Case Number: 35941-0-1
Issue:
  • Pollution Exclusion and Coverages
State:
  • Washington
Kent Farms, Inc. vs. Zurich Insurance Company
Year: 1998
Court: Washington State Supreme Court
Case Number: 67635-6
Issue:
  • Interpretation of coverage
State:
  • Washington

Insurance companies cannot abrogate their insurance policies by applying in practice a more restrictive interpretation of coverage than what was represented to the insurance commissioners in order to obtain approval of the language of the policy and associated premiums.
Jones, Janet and Jones, Terry v. Allstate Insurance Co et al
Year: 1999
Court: Washington State Court of Appeals
Case Number: 46005-6-1
Issue:
  • Conflict of Interest
State:
  • Washington

Allstate cannot be allowed to deceive policyholders and third party claimants by failing to inform them they may be in an adversarial position with the insurance company and that the insurance company has no obligation to protect the victim.
Mathis vs. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company
Year: 1998
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 98-36001
Issue:
  • Bad Faith
State:
  • Washington

Court should unequivocally declare that the termination of an insurance company employee for refusal to engage in bad faith conduct contravenes a clear mandate of public policy and subjects the insurance company employer to liability in tort for wrongful discharge.
Strandley vs. CAN Insurance Company
Year: 1998
Court: Washington State Supreme Court
Case Number:
Issue:
  • Statute of Limitations
State:
  • Washington
American Games, Inc. vs. Trade Products, Inc.
Year: 1997
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 97-35275
Issue:
State:
  • Washington
Pistorese v. Transamerica Life Insurance Company
Year: 2014
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 14-35027
Issue:
  • Contract Interpretation
  • Long Term Care Insurance
State:
  • Washington

Under Washington law, insurance contracts are to be interpreted based on the principle of contra preferentem – ambigious terms must be strictly construed against the drafter-insurer and in favor of the insured as to effectuate coverage. UP argued in its brief, that in the long-term-care…