Decrease Font Size
Increase Font Size

Coverage Alerts


Brandt fees awarded post-verdict should be considered in determining constitutionality of compensatory damages/punitive damages ratio. This decision follows the remand ordered by the California Supreme Court in Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 363.


Trial court grant of summary judgment in favor of insurer proper as insurer correctly cancelled auto
policy before accident.


Insurer which refused a policy limits demand because it included language related to court ordered restitution did so due to its own misunderstanding of the language and was liable for bad faith refusal to settle.


Insurer's policy language allowed it to repair damaged vehicle rather than simply pay the loss in money if the vehicle is returned in its normal running condition, even if the vehicle does not retain its pre-accident market value.


Genuine dispute doctrine defeats claims of bad faith and elder abuse in dispute over scope of loss arising out of claim for damages from rain water intrusion.


Brandt fees awarded post-verdict may be considered in determining constitutionality of compensatory/punitive damage ratio.


Parent and controlling shareholder of insured corporation had no standing to sue insurer for declaratory relief arising out of asbestos lawsuits, and therefore could not be joined to defeat diversity jurisdiction.


 "Other insurance" clause that operated as a disfavored escape clause will not excuse an insurer from its defense obligations just because it is located within the insuring agreement of the policy.


Summary judgment in favor of insurance broker was improper where plaintiffs' assignment claims were not limited by equitable subrogation principles.


Mother's auto policy, which excluded "regular use" of a non-owned auto, did not cover daughter's exclusive use of father's vehicle.