The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the application of an assault and battery exclusion and endorsement leading to the application of a $250,000 wasting limit, as opposed to a non-wasting $1,000,000 limit. See Century Sur. Co.
Washington State voters approved the Insurance Fair Conduct Act (“IFCA”) in 2007. IFCA increases the penalties available against insurers, including uncapped treble damages and expert witness fees. IFCA’s language says that it applies to “any
This edition of the Insurance Commando Blog analyzes Tidyman’s Management Services, Inc. v. Davis, 376 Mont. 80, 330 P.3d 1139 (2014), a recent Montana decision finding a Montana insurer liable for a $29,000,000 stipulated judgment.
This is the first in what I anticipate will be a series of blog entries asking the Washington Office of the Insurance Commissioner to propose, and the Washington Legislature to adopt, some changes to Washington
This installment of the Insurance Commando Blog discusses a case related to its July 14, 2014 blog entry, in which we discussed the “intentional loss” exclusion in a first-party homeowners’ policy. IDS Prop. and Cas.
The lawyers of the Insurance Commando Blog are frequently asked to write, or help write, reservation of rights letters. Recently, a federal judge in Missouri listed 10 requirements for reservation of rights letters. Western Ins.
Here at the Insurance Commando Blog, we recently received a favorable ruling from Judge Robart holding that extracontractual UIM claims are barred by the doctrine of res judicata when those claims are threatened, but not
In our inaugural April 11, 2014 blog entry, “The Elephant in the Room,” we expressed hope that Washington’s Supreme Court would adopt a more reasonable duty to defend rule. Most states allow insurers to rely
Here at the Insurance Commando Blog we appreciate creative ways to argue a policy exclusion. We especially appreciate it when a judge adopts such arguments in upholding the application of an exclusion. Recently, Judge Ronald
Washington’s Supreme Court is correctly regarded as one of the worst forums for property and casualty insurers. But late this past year, insurers received a glimmer of hope in a case with novel facts. Even
