Docket No. 87231-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 66102-7)
Synopsis: Whether a partner in a general partnership qualifies as a third party to an indemnification agreement between the partnership and another business bringing the personal injuries he suffered while on the job within the coverage provided by the partnership’s comprehensive general liability insurance policy.
Blog Archives
Chicago Title Insurance v. Office of the Insurance Commissioner
Docket No. 87215-5 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 40752-3)
Synopsis: Whether a statewide title insurance company that underwrote policies for a local title insurance company may be held vicariously liable for the local company’s violations of insurance regulations.
Synopsis: Whether a statewide title insurance company that underwrote policies for a local title insurance company may be held vicariously liable for the local company’s violations of insurance regulations.
Staples v. Allstate Ins. Co.
Docket No. 86413-6 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64816-1)
Synopsis: Whether an insured’s refusal to submit to a contractually required prelawsuit examination under oath precludes the insured from bringing a breach of contract action against the insurer.
Synopsis: Whether an insured’s refusal to submit to a contractually required prelawsuit examination under oath precludes the insured from bringing a breach of contract action against the insurer.
National Surety Corp. v. Immunex Corp.
Docket No. 86535-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64712-1)
Synopsis: Whether an insurer may be required to reimburse its insured for defense expenditures incurred from the date that a complaint was filed against the insured until entry of a declaratory judgment that the insurer had no duty to defend the suit.
Synopsis: Whether an insurer may be required to reimburse its insured for defense expenditures incurred from the date that a complaint was filed against the insured until entry of a declaratory judgment that the insurer had no duty to defend the suit.
Cedell v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Wash.
Docket No. 85366-5 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 38921-5)
Synopsis: Whether an insurer who employed an attorney to help determine coverage may invoke the attorney-client privilege to defeat the insureds discovery request in a first party action for bad faith denial of coverage.
Synopsis: Whether an insurer who employed an attorney to help determine coverage may invoke the attorney-client privilege to defeat the insureds discovery request in a first party action for bad faith denial of coverage.
Matsyuk v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company
Docket No. 84686-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 64151-4) Facts: Petitioner Olga Matsyuk was injured while riding in an automobile driven by Omelyan Stemditsky. Matsyuk subsequently recovered $1,874 in personal injury benefits from Stemditsky’s insurance policy with respondent State Farm Fire & Casualty Company. Matsyuk also recovered $5,874 from State Farm in its capacity as Stemditsky’s liability insurer after reaching a settlement with State Farm. After State Farm indicated that it would seek reimbursement of its personal injury payment through an offset to the liability payment, Matsyuk demanded that this offset be reduced by a prorated share of the attorney fees she incurred in obtaining the settlement. Continue reading
Moeller v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington
Docket No. 84500-0 (from Court of Appeals Division II Case No. 30880-1) Facts: After respondent David Moeller’s automobile was damaged in a collision, it was repaired by his insurer, petitioner Farmers Insurance Company of Washington. Moeller subsequently filed a class action against Farmers Insurance Company on behalf of himself and others similarly situated in the Superior Court for Pierce County, asserting that Farmers Insurance Company breached his insurance contract by failing to pay him the difference between his automobile’s pre-collision value and its post-repair value. The trial court certified the class but ultimately granted summary judgment for Farmers Insurance Company, ruling that the language of Moeller’s insurance policy precludes his diminished value claim. Continue reading
Holden v. Farmers Insurance Company of Washington
Docket No. 81487-2 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 59024-3) Facts: Following a fire at her home, petitioner Laura Holden submitted a claim to her insurer, respondent Farmers Insurance Company of Washington, seeking reimbursement for her lost property. Continue reading
Campbell v. Ticor Title Insurance Company
Docket No. 80999-2 (from Court of Appeals Division III Case No. 25327-9) Facts: After Jerry Edwards, the owner of an adjacent property, filed suit against petitioner Dale Campbell in order to obtain an easement burdening Campbell’s property, Campbell tendered defense of the claim to his title insurance company, respondent Ticor Title Insurance Company. Continue reading
Planet Earth Found. v. Gulf Underwriters Ins. Co.
Docket No. 78287-3 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 55068-3) Synopsis: What constitutes “professional services” for the purpose of exclusionary clauses in insurance policies? Continue reading