On certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court confronted the issue of whether statutory bad faith claims may be assigned to an injured third party when the insured settles its claim and/or chooses not to pursue its own cause of action. Pennsylvania law has long since allowed for common law tort claims to be assigned and in creating a statutory cause of action for bad faith, the Legislature made no effort to limit assignment. UP reminded the Court that insurers should not be able to escape liability for wrongful delay or denial of a valid claim simply because the insured chooses not to pursue an action for tort damages. Bad faith is unlike other “personal” torts, which generally may not be assigned, in that the harm done is suffered by both the insured and the injured third party. Public policy favors assignability of bad faith claims in order to compensate all injured parties and deter future tortious conduct. Read more about the case here.In a decision issued Dcember 15, 2014, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court agreed with UP and held that bad faith claims are assignable under Pennsylvania law. Read the decision of the Supreme Court, agreeing with UP and citing our amicus brief throughout.
- Assignment of Bad Faith Claims
- Public Policy and Tort Remedies
In its brief, UP, along with the National Independent Venue Association (NIVA), opposed a Motion to Dismiss a COVID-19 Business Interruption Claim by Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Co. UP and NIVA discuss the application of a Virus or Bacteria Exclusion and whether insurers misrepresentations that property…
- Errors and Omissions
Errors and Omissions, or “E&O” insurance. If an insurance company attempts to avoid its coverage obligations under a claims-made policy due to “late notice,” the insurance company must bear the burden to prove that notice was late, just like under an occurrence policy. Even when…
Since the term “collapse” in the policy is ambiguous and connotes only a substantial impairment of a building’s structural integrity, there must be coverage for “imminent collapse” Court quotes UP’s brief.
Policyholders should have the right to select the policies under which they seek coverage, without fear of prejudice to any Laches or Course of Performance Argument. Courts should not hamstring a policyholder’s efforts to obtain evidence of custom and usage in the insurance industry, particularly…