Published: May 31, 2018

After Melissa Parisi sustained injuries in a vehicle collision and learned that the other motorist involved in the crash carried only $15,000 in auto insurance, she submitted an underinsured motorist (UIM) claim to State Farm, her insurer. Soon after Parisi filed her claim in May 2014, she and State Farm began exchanging letters and documentation regarding the substantial cognitive injuries that Parisi incurred in the accident, as well as the status of Parisi’s claim against the other motorist’s insurer.  

. . . . . .

Published: March 6, 2018

​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 One's insurer, Defendant National American Insurance Company (NAIC), the case went to trial and plaintiffs won a jury verdict of more than $3.6 million - well in excess of the $1 million insurance coverage Venture One had with NAIC.  The plaintiffs in that case obtained a judicial lien on Venture One's assets, including an assignment of Venture One’s rights ag

. . . . . .

Published: March 6, 2018

​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 One's insurer, Defendant National American Insurance Company (NAIC), the case went to trial and plaintiffs won a jury verdict of more than $3.6 million - well in excess of the $1 million insurance coverage Venture One had with NAIC.  The plaintiffs in that case obtained a judicial lien on Venture One's assets, including an assignment of Venture One’s rights ag

. . . . . .

Published: March 21, 2017

McDaniel v. Govt. Empls. Ins. Co., No. 14-17203, 2017 WL 892516 (9th Cir. Mar. 7, 2017)

On cross-motions for summary judgment, the District Court for the Eastern District of California ruled in favor of Amy McDaniel, holding that GEICO had breached the implied duty to settle her lawsuit against a GEICO insured. GEICO appealed that ruling.

. . . . . .

Published: January 3, 2017

United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit rules that insurer’s offer to settle claims for policy limit in exchange for release and indemnification of insured strikes proper balance between competing duties of good faith to plaintiff and insured under Kentucky law.

. . . . . .

Published: January 3, 2017

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirms District Court’s ruling that company’s liability insurer does not owe a duty to settle to former employee in action against company.

. . . . . .

Published: August 18, 2016

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri denies work product privilege to documents created before insurer knew insured had retained counsel and was considering legal action and to information prepared in the ordinary course of business and not for purposes of litigation, but upholds privilege as to protected information absent a showing of substantial need and undue hardship

. . . . . .

Published: December 1, 2014

Tibble v. Am. Physicians Capital, Inc., No. 306944, 2014 WL 5462573 (Mich. Ct. App. Oct. 28, 2014).

The Michigan Court of Appeals holds that although the trial court erred when it defined “bad faith” for the jury, the court’s error did not require reversal because the applicable law regarding bad faith was adequately presented.

. . . . . .