Split On Issue, But Sixth District Says Brandt Appellate Fees Are Recoverable. After an insured won an insurance dispute on appeal, the insured requested attorney’s fees under Brandt v. Superior Court, 37 Cal.3d 18 (1985) in the recent unpublished decision of Olsen v. The Standard Fire Ins. Co., Case Nos. H042154/H042260 (6th Dist. […]
Pre-2007 CGL Policies Were At Issue. We have a year-end case for you insurance practitioners, especially coverage attorneys. In Navigators Specialty Ins. Co. v. Moorefield Construction, Inc., Case No. G050759 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 27, 2016) (published), our local Santa Ana court of appeal decided that a pre-2007 CGL “supplementary payments”
Case Was On Remand From California Supreme Court. On June 9, 2016, we posted on Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co., 63 Cal.4th 363, 368, 371, 377 (2016), which decided that Brandt fees should be added to compensatory damages for purposes of determining the compensatory damages ratio for purposes of adjudging the reasonableness
You Betcha, State Supreme Court Decided. In Nickerson v. Stonebridge Life Ins. Co., Case No. S213873 (Cal. Supreme Court June 9, 2016), the California Supreme Court confronted the issue of whether attorney’s fees awarded to a prevailing plaintiff in a “bad faith” insurance lawsuit should be considered where attorney’s fees under Brandt v.
. . .Under Limited “Padded Bill” Circumstances. We do commend that any insurance or tort practitioners read Hartford Cas. Ins. Co. v. J.R. Marketing, LLC, Case No. S211645 (Cal. Supreme Court Aug. 10, 2015) (published) given that it does allow insurers to directly pursue Cumis counsel for restitution based discovery for padded bills
Rate Restrictions Apply No Earlier Than When Insurer Agrees to Pay for Prospective Dates Onward. Although unpublished, insurance practitioners will want to read City Art, Inc. v. Superior Court (Travelers Property Cas. Co. of America), Case No. B256132 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Dec. 9, 2014) (unpublished). In granting an insured’s writ petition,
Defense Costs Were Properly Paid by Carrier Until Subsequent Investigation Showed No Coverage Potential. Insured must be breathing somewhat easier after the appellate result in Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London v. Mestmaker, Case No. F066016 (5th Dist. Apr. 29, 2014) (unpublished), which reviewed a lower judge order directing the insured to pay back
Broker Also Liable To Insured for Fees Under Tort of Another, But Matter Had To Be Reconsidered Given Reversal Of Judgment In Favor Of Insured And Against Insurer. De La Torre v. Century Surety Co., Case No. D061028 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 24, 2014) (unpublished) was tripartite litigation involving insured versus insurer,
Insurance Policy Providing Coverage for Damages Does Not Entitle Insurer to Defense for Injunctive-Only Suit. In our October 5, 2013 post, we discussed San Miguel Community Assn. v. State Farm Gen. Ins. Co., Case No. G047738 (4th Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 1, 2013), an unpublished decision holding that an insured under a policy
Second District, Division 8 Is Not Going To Be First Court To So Hold to the Contrary. In Aguilar v. Gostischef, Case No. B238853 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Oct. 13, 2013) (published), a plaintiff losing a leg in an automobile accident made pre-trial offers to attempt to accept defendant’s insured’s $100,000 policy limits
