News & Analysis as of

Breach of Duty › Cumis Counsel

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Anti-Slapp Statute Does Not Apply To Allegations That Insurer Improperly Refused To Provide Cumis Counsel

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on

Miller Marital Deduction Trust v. Zurich American Insurance Company, — P.3d –, 2019 WL 5304862; First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Division Three, Case No. A155398 (October 21, 2019). In Miller Marital Deduction...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Independent “Cumis” Counsel Now Face Direct Claims for Reimbursement From Insurers

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on

On April 30, 2015, we blogged about Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, LLC, Case No. S211645, then set for oral argument in the California Supreme Court. [see the prior post: California’s “Independent”...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under...

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on

The California Supreme Court held in Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, L.L.C. (Squire Sanders) (8/10/2015 - #S211645) that if Cumis counsel, operating under a court order which such counsel drafted and...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

California’s “Independent” Cumis Counsel Regime Faces A Novel Challenge

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on

On May 5, the California Supreme Court will hear argument in a case that has the potential to profoundly change the relationship between the insurer, its insured and the insured’s independent defense counsel under Civil Code...more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide