In Progressive Northwest Insurance Co. v. Lautenschlager, 488 P.3d 509 (Idaho 2021), the Idaho Supreme Court considered whether a “combined single limit” automobile policy satisfied the State’s Financial Responsibility Act. The Court noted that the insurer’s maximum...
Year: 2021
Escape Clauses Within A Garage Policy Held To Be Void Under New Jersey Law
In Higgins v. Aguilar, 246 N.J. 75, 248 A.3d 1213 (N.J. 2021), Federal Insurance Company insured a car dealership with $1 million of liability coverage for the dealership vehicles. The Federal policy purportedly extended liability coverage to customers using dealer...
Taxes and Associated Fees In Acquiring A Replacement Vehicle Are Not Required To Be Calculated As The Automobile’s ACV When Dealing With A Physical Damage Claim
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals recently held in Wilkerson v. American Family Insurance Co., 997 F.3d 666 (6th Cir. 2021) that ACV meant market value in a standard automobile policy and that market value did not include the taxes and fees that the insured needed to...
Step Down For Crime
The South Carolina Supreme Court recently considered an automobile policy stepdown clause in relationship to criminal misconduct. In Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Walls, 433 S.C. 206, 858 S.E.2d 150 (S.C. 2021) an automobile accident occurred as a result of...
California Court of Appeals Weighs in on When The Duty to Attempt Settlement is Triggered
In Planet Bingo, LLC v. Burlington Insurance Co., 62 Cal. App. 4th 44, 276 Cal. Rptr. 3d 348 (4th Dist. 2021), the Court found that a liability insurance carrier may have a duty to attempt settlement even though there is no settlement demand within policy limits. The...
BAD FAITH SET-UP FAILS
The recent case of Eres v. Progressive American Insurance Co., 998 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2021) demonstrates the failure of a questionable attempt to set up the insurance company for bad faith. In this case, the insured driver caused a motor vehicle accident which...
MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT FINDS THAT HOMEOWNER POLICY’S MOTOR VEHICLE EXCLUSION APPLIED TO A CLAIM OF DELAY AND RENDERING AID TO AN ACCIDENT VICTIM AFTER A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT OCCURRED
In Champ v. Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, 2021 WL 790679 (Miss. March 2, 2021), a pedestrian was struck by a vehicle. The driver of the vehicle stated that she did not know that her vehicle hit something until she reported the incident to her...
NORTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT RULES THAT REGULAR USE EXCLUSION IN EMPLOYER’S AUTOMOBILE POLICY WAS NOT ENFORCEABLE
In Pioneer State Mutual Insurance Company v. Bear Creek Gravel, Inc., 956 N.W.2d 377 (2021), the North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed a trial court ruling finding that a regular use exclusion set forth in an employer’s policy did not impose restrictions on an...
LOUISIANA COURT FINDS UM REGULAR USE EXCLUSION VIOLATED LOUISIANA LAW
In Higgins v. Louisiana Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, 315 So.3d 838 (2021), the claimant was injured in a motor vehicle accident while operating a truck owned by his employer. The tortfeasor was underinsured. The employer’s policy did not have underinsured...
NORTH DAKOTA SUPREME COURT WEIGHS IN ON REGULAR USE EXCLUSIONS IN COMMERCIAL POLICY
Recently, the North Dakota Supreme Court held that an employee’s use of a company owned vehicle did not constitute regular use within the purview of a regular use exclusion. In Pioneer State Mutual Insurance Co. v. Bear Creek Gravel, Inc., 2021 WL 1114155 (N.D. March...