Breaking Down Bad Faith: Insurers’ Good Faith Duties and Defending Bad Faith Claims
JONES DAY PRESENTS®: Insurance Implications of the California Consumer Privacy Act
In S.O. Beach Corp. v. Great American Insurance Company of New York, No. 18-1967 (11th Cir. Oct. 31, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in full to the insurer, finding there...more
Bryant v. GeoVera Specialty Insurance Company, No. 4D18-189 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. May 8, 2019) - Hershel and Betty Bryant’s residence sustained damage caused by a pipe leak. The Bryants subsequently reported the loss to...more
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently granted an insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a case arising from Superstorm Sandy based on unambiguous policy language providing a...more
The Georgia Court of Appeals recently made waves in Hughes v. First Acceptance Insurance Company of Georgia, Inc., 343 Ga. App. 693 (2017). First, it aggrandized the role of a jury in determining the existence of an offer to...more
Following a fatal vehicle accident in 2008, a group of plaintiffs brought suit against Venture One, Inc., the owner of a truck involved in the accident. After several unsuccessful attempts to settle the matter with Venture...more
Cozen O’Connor attorneys Thomas McKay III, Richard Mackowsky, Charles Jesuit, and Melissa Brill recently secured summary judgment from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York in favor of Great...more
In Film Allman, LLC v. New York Marine and General Insurance Company, Inc., 2:14-cv-7069-ODW, (C.D. Cal. May 23, 2017), a California district court granted summary judgment in favor of an insurer of a production company. The...more
The Third District Court of Appeals finding recently held that in certain circumstances, a third party can maintain a bad faith claim against an insurer even if the insured is not exposed to liability in excess of the policy...more
We have previously featured New Jersey District Court decisions addressing “unequivocal” denials in the context of policies’ suit limitation provisions. In the latest, Ryan v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., No. 14-6308...more
Does the efficient proximate cause rule serve to afford coverage for the additional costs to rebuild the foundation of a home in compliance with changed building code requirements beyond the sublimit of liability of an...more
As this blog has reported, exclusions and limits for flood coverage have generally held up against the tide of claims arising from Superstorm Sandy. Now that the water is gone, however, new losses have been discovered, and...more
In National Railroad Passenger Corp. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16074 (2d. Cir. Aug. 31, 2016), Amtrak sought the entire $675 million of available coverage from a number of its insurers for damages...more
Courts across the country (and particularly since Super Storm Sandy in 2012) have consistently held that, in litigation involving a dispute concerning the investigation, adjustment, or payment of a flood claim under the...more
In Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, London v. Arch Specialty Ins. Co. (No. C072500; filed 4/11/16), a California appeals court found an “other insurance” provision unenforceable to excuse defense contribution between...more
Ever since Mattis v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 118 Ill.App.3d 612, 73 Ill.Dec. 907, 454 N.E.2d 1156 (1983), Illinois courts have held that an earth movement exclusion contained in a first-party policy applies only to earth...more
In a new decision, Mesa v. Clarendon National Ins. Co., 2015 WL 5059496, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 15203 (11th Cir., Aug. 28, 2015), the Court of Appeals found that the insurer’s claims-handling of multiple claimants did not rise...more
California Court: Rejected Demand Within Policy Limits Not Necessary for Bad Faith Claim - Why it matters: Insurers must proceed with caution when they become aware that a settlement within policy limits is possible,...more