The Third Circuit Court of Appeals held in a recent precedential case that the court must compel arbitration between Government Employees Insurance Company (Geico) and several medical practices, which Geico had sued for fraud...more
Anyone injured in an accident allegedly caused by the negligence of another can sue for pain caused by the injury. The increasing number of surgeries injuries from accidents is now a major focus of defendants and the...more
Seifer v. Government Employees Insurance Company, decided by the First Circuit on May 13, 2022, raises an issue that could cause insurers to rethink how they handle claim investigations and pre-suit settlements. Seifer raises...more
On May 25, 2022, in Grossman v. GEICO Cas. Co. (No. 21-278), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s dismissal of an attempted class action by two automobile policyholders alleging that GEICO...more
On February 15, 2022, the United States Court of Appeal for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the Southern District of Florida’s summary judgment victory for GEICO, finding that no reasonable jury could conclude that GEICO had...more
Causation, an issue courts often wrestle with when deciding insurance coverage issues, lands the starring role in our February Insurance Update. •A county experienced higher costs due to the opioid crisis. Does its...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently addressed the issue of whether tendering a policy limits check on a liability policy with an overbroad release could constitute bad faith. In Pelaez v....more
In Florida, an insurer is required to “settle, if possible, where a reasonably prudent person, faced with the prospect of paying the total recovery, would do so[.]” Harvey v. GEICO General Insurance Company, 259 So.3d 1 (Fla....more
On June 1, 2021, theEleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment granted in favor of an insurer in a third party bad faith claim. The case, Eres v. Progressive American Insurance Company, Case No. 20-11006,...more
An insurer can no longer claim its lack of notice of a lawsuit against its insured excuses it for failing to settle the suit after the Georgia Supreme Court’s recent decision in GEICO Indemnity Co. v. Whiteside, Case No....more
The Florida Supreme Court recently decided Harvey v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. SC17-85, 2018 WL 4496566, at *1 (Fla. Sept. 20, 2018), an important case setting forth what many will try to argue has lessened the standard for...more
In a highly anticipated decision, a sharply divided Florida Supreme Court reversed the decision of the state’s Fourth District Court of Appeal and reinstated a jury’s $9.2 million verdict against GEICO for the insurer’s...more
In a significant but not entirely novel ruling, the South Carolina Supreme Court recently held that South Carolina law does not require the pro rata apportionment of punitive damages between damages sustained for bodily...more
The Ninth Circuit recently issued an unpublished memorandum opinion reducing a $2.5 million punitive award against GEICO to $1,064,282.44—four times the compensatory damages—in a Montana insurance bad-faith case. When it...more
In two recent opinions, the SC Court of Appeals reminded readers that parties are free to contract as they see fit, as long as the contract provisions at issue are not contrary to public policy or a statutory prohibition. It...more
South Carolina has never recognized a bad faith cause of action based upon the failure of an underinsured (UIM) carrier to settle a UIM claim. Maintaining the established precedent, the United States District Court recently...more
To understand the implications of Macedo II, it is important to understand what brought us here. It’s a long and bumpy road, but understanding what brought us here will be critical in order to understanding how to go forward....more
For years, when a bad faith action was brought pursuant to a jury verdict in excess of policy limits in the underlying UM claim, everyone assumed the jury verdict was binding in the bad faith action. Then, Bottini v. GEICO...more
In Medina v. GEICO Indemnity (No. F072548, filed 2/8/17), a California appeals court ruled that a work van admittedly furnished to an employee for both business and personal purposes, being used for personal purposes at the...more
As this decision explains, the Court of Chancery will not have jurisdiction based on the claim an injunction is needed to force a defendant to comply with the proper interpretation of a contract....more
It feels like a black swan event: last month, in GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. v. Harvey, No. 4D15-2724 (Fla. Ct. App. Jan. 4, 2017), a Florida appellate panel unanimously overturned a jury verdict, on the ground that the plaintiff’s...more
Directs Judgment to be Entered in Favor of Insurer - In GEICO v. Harvey, (Fla. 4th DCA Jan. 4, 2017), Florida’s Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred in denying the insurer’s motion for directed...more
In Cadle v. GEICO Ins. Co., Case No. 15-11283 (11th Cir. Sept. 30, 2016), the Eleventh Circuit held that GEICO had not acted in bad faith when it failed to settle a claim after the insured did not provide any evidence of...more
This decision addresses issues that may arise when there are successive arbitrations involving the same basic set of facts, if different parties. It concludes that when engaging in the limited judicial review which asks...more
On Friday, September 30, 2016, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law that had been granted by the Middle District Court of Florida in a uninsured/underinsured motorist...more