In Farmers Texas Cty. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Zuniga, 548 S.W.3d 646 (Tex. App. 2017), the Court found that the specific language of an automobile liability policy’s insuring agreement precluded coverage for punitive damages in the first instance. The language in the...
Injuries
INDIANA COURT FINDS ONE OCCURRENCE
In a recent case, the Indiana Court of Appeals held that while a spill of hazardous materials resulted from two distinct regulatory violations, the event was a single occurrence for purposes of insurance. In Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Long, 112 N.E.3d 1165 (Ind. Ct. App....
9th Circuit Requires That Any Illness or Infirmity Causing or Contributing to Injury For Purposes of Accidental Death and Dismemberment Benefits Had to be a Substantial Cause of the Loss to Avoid Coverage
In Dowdy v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 890 F.3d 802 (9th Cir. 2018), the insured sought benefits under an accidental death and dismemberment policy for an amputation of his leg resulting from a car accident. The leg was seriously injured as a result of the accident and was...
Is The Insurer Obligated To Notify The Insured Of Any Inadequacy Of Automobile Liability Coverage?
The question of whether an insurance company had an obligation to provide advice to the insured on the adequacy of liability coverage was recently addressed by the Washington Court of Appeals in Junfang He v. Norris v. Farmers Ins. Co. of America, 415 P.3d 1219 (Wash....
A Pedestrian’s Being Struck By A Motor Vehicle Did Not Give Rise To “Occupancy” During The Sequence In Which The Pedestrian Was In Physical Contact With The Vehicle
In Hahn v. GEICO Choice Insurance Co., 420 P.3d 1160 (Alaska 2018), the Alaska Supreme Court held that UIM benefits did not extend to a person falling on an insured vehicle after it struck him. In this case, the insured was sitting on his motorcycle while stopped at a...
MISSOURI HIGH COURT CALCULATES UIM ATTACHMENT POINT
The Missouri Supreme Court in Swadley v. Shelter Mutual Insurance Co., 513 S.W.3d 355 (Mo. 2017) held that UIM coverage did not apply when the underinsured motorist had liability coverage limits greater than the insured's underinsured motorist limits. Previously, the...
MISSISSIPPI SUPREME COURT FINDS THAT LOSS OF CONSORTIUM CLAIMS ARE PART OF THE PER PERSON LIMITS FOR UIM COVERAGE
The Mississippi Supreme Court in Rylee v. Progressive Gulf Insurance Co., 2017 WL 949545 (Miss. Mar. 9, 2017) found that a UIM policy's "each person" limit applied not only to a husband's bodily injury claim, but also to the wife's loss of consortium claim, i.e., loss...
INSURANCE COMPANY RELIANCE UPON IME REPORT TO SUPPORT RULE 12 B6 MOTION TO DISMISS IN BAD FAITH CASE DID NOT REQUIRE DISMISSAL
The South Dakota Supreme Court in Mordhorst v. Dakota Truck Underwriters and Risk Administrative Services 886 N.W.2d 322 (S.D 2016) recently found that a rule 12-B6 motion to dismiss was not appropriate in a worker's compensation bad faith case notwithstanding the...
CALIFORNIA COURT FINDS THAT SPECULATION UPON HOW AN EMPLOYEE WAS INJURED DID NOT GIVE RISE TO A POTENTIAL FOR COVERAGE AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED
The issue of whether a general contractor qualified as an additional insured under a sub contactor excess policy for a work related injury turned on whether there was evidence that the sub-contractor caused the claimants injuries according to the recent case of Advent...
INSURANCE COMPANIES HAGGLING OVER RELEASE LANGUAGE CAN RESULT IN BAD FAITH LIABILITY
In Barickman v. Mercury Cas. Co., 2 Cal.App.5th 508, 206 Cal.Rptr.3d 699 (2d Dist. 2016), an insurance company's refusal to consent to additional release language which was designed to preserve the claimant's rights to receive criminal restitution from the insured...