Insurers Can’t Wait Around for Settlement Offer If Liability Is Clear (the Ninth Circuit Addresses Bad Faith, part 1)

by Farella Braun + Martel LLP

[author: Richard Robinson]

When the liability of its insured is clear, must an insurer proactively attempt to settle a claim within policy limits in order to avoid bad faith liability?  Or is it sufficient to wait until a reasonable settlement offer is made?  A court of appeals panel in the Ninth Circuit recently weighed in on the issue, holding that when liability is clear, an insurer has a duty to attempt to reach a settlement, even absent a demand from the claimant. 

In Du v. Allstate Insurance Co., 12 C.D.O.S. 6368, the appellant, Yang Fang Du and three other parties were injured in a car accident involving an individual insured by Deerbrook Insurance Company (a subsidiary of Allstate).  Deerbrook quickly determined that its insured was liable for the accident, but initially had difficulty ascertaining the extent of the injuries of the four injured parties, despite repeated requests for more information.  Finally, several months into the dispute, the plaintiffs’ attorneys submitted a $300,000 global settlement offer to Deerbrook, but only provided documentation of Du’s medical costs (which totaled just over $100,000).  Deerbrook rejected the global settlement, but offered to settle Du’s claims alone for $100,000 (the policy’s limit for individual claims).  Du’s attorneys rejected this offer as “too little too late” and proceeded to file suit against Deerbrook’s insured.  Du eventually received a jury verdict of over $4 million, Deerbrook contributed its $100,000 policy limit, and Du sued Deerbrook for the balance under an assignment of rights.

In the subsequent bad faith litigation, the trial court rejected a jury instruction that would have permitted the jury to “consider whether the defendant did not attempt in good faith to reach a prompt, fair, and equitable settlement of [the claim] after liability . . . had become reasonably clear.”  The district court concluded that an insurer has no duty to initiate settlement discussions in the absence of a demand from the third-party claimant, and that even if such a duty existed, settlement was broached sufficiently early in the case to vitiate any claim for a failure to initiate  negotiations.  Deerbrook prevailed at trial and Du appealed, citing the court’s refusal to include the jury instruction.

The Ninth Circuit upheld the result, but took the opportunity to “address the issue” of the insurer’s duty to initiate settlement discussions.  The court explained that the duty to act in good faith “requires an insurer to effectuate settlement when liability is reasonably clear, even in the  absence of a settlement demand.”  First, the court pointed out that the conflict of interest that “animates” an insurer’s duty to settle applies regardless of whether a settlement demand is made by the insured party.  If liability were clear, a rational party would attempt to settle a case that also carried a substantial likelihood of recovery in excess of policy limits.  The court also noted that prior Ninth Circuit case law supported a duty to initiate settlement negotiations in similar circumstances, and that California courts have not held to the contrary.  Finally, the court noted that this result was supported by California Insurance Code section 790.03(h), which explicitly identifies “[n]ot attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear” as an “unfair” practice.  The court ruled that the “proposed instruction was a fair statement of the law.”  In Du’s case, however, settlement discussions were broached early enough to foreclose the plaintiff’s claim that Deerbrook failed to make a settlement offer in time.  It was reasonable for Deerbrook towait until it had corroboration of Du’s injuries before it began settlement discussions.

The Du case is significant because it clearly indicates that an insurer cannot simply wait until the plaintiff makes a demand within limits; it must attempt to proactively settle within policy limits where liability is clear and there is a risk of exposure in excess of the policy limits.  As the court noted, this rule makes sense, because a self-interested party probably wouldn’t wait too long to initiate settlement discussions in such a situation. 

The Du case also illustrates that liability is not the only factor impacting when an insurer should initiate settlement discussions – the insurer must also have some idea of the extent of the insured’s exposure.  If the extent of the harm to the third-party plaintiff – and the resulting exposure – is unclear, then an insurer can argue that a settlement offer is untimely until it obtains proof of the plaintiffs’ injuries.  Deerbrook had been attempting to ascertain the extent of Ms. Du’s injuries, and promptly offered its policy limits once it received corroborating proof.  Of course, an insurer who passively waits for proof of the third party’s damages probably still exposes itself to bad faith liability, since a self-interested party would also seek to determine its own exposure.  Similarly, it stands to reason that when damages clearly exceed policy limits, and liability is clear, the insurer has a duty to promptly initiate settlement discussions, even if the precise extent of the injury is unclear.  As the Ninth Circuit made clear, when it doubt, an insurer must do what its insured would do in the same situation.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Farella Braun + Martel LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.