U.S. Fidelity And Guarantee Co. V. U.S. Sports Specialty Ass’n
Year 2011
Court Utah Supreme Court
Case Number WL 192793
Issue
  • Duty to Settle
State
  • Utah

In this case an insurer went after its insured to recoup monies it had paid (over policy limits) as part of a settlement. UP argued that because the insurer had initiated the settlement and because there was no right of restitution expressly stated in the policy, it could not recoup. In a significant opinion favorable to policyholders, the Utah Supreme Court agreed.

Related Docs
Author The Brief was written pro bono by William G. Passannante, Esq. of Anderson Kill & Olick, PC. and Marc Ladd, Esq.
Related Cases
United States Fidelity and Guarantee Co. vs. United States Sports Specialty Association
Year: 2009
Court: Utah Supreme Court
Case Number: 20090657-SC
Issue:
  • Duty to Settle
State:
  • Utah

In this case an insurer went after its insured to recoup monies it had paid (over policy limits) as part of a settlement. UP argued that because the insurer had initiated the settlement and because there was no right of restitution expressly stated in the…
U.S. Fidelity And Guarantee Co. V. U.S. Sports Specialty Ass’n
Year: 2011
Court: Utah Supreme Court
Case Number: WL 192793
Issue:
  • Duty to Settle
State:
  • Utah

In this case an insurer went after its insured to recoup monies it had paid (over policy limits) as part of a settlement. UP argued that because the insurer had initiated the settlement and because there was no right of restitution expressly stated in the…
Jesus Camacho et al v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
Year: 2017
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit
Case Number: 16-14225
Issue:
  • Duty to Settle
  • Good Faith and Fair Dealing
State:
  • Georgia

An insurer’s duty of good faith and fair dealing extends to settling claims against its insured. In a liability case, such as an automobile accident, an insurer must take and active role in settlement negotiations and where a reasonable settlement offer within policy limits is…