Blog

Court Upholds California Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Enforce Insurance Regulations

Posted by Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on Sep 28th 2018

Court Upholds California Insurance Commissioner’s Authority to Enforce Insurance Regulations
In PacifiCare Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Jones (No. G053914, filed 9/20/18), a California appeals court upheld the California Insurance Commissioner’s authority to impose a $173 million penalty on a health insurer based on a finding of multiple violations of the State’s Insurance Code and insurance regulations.In PacifiCare, the Insurance Commissioner, Dave Jones, imposed the fines after finding 900,000 violations of the Unfair Insurance Practices Act (Ins. Code §§ 790, et seq., “UIPA”). Insu
Read more

Oregon Case Law Update: Oregon Court of Appeals Provides Guidance on a PIP Insurer’s Duty to Promptly Pay PIP Benefits after Receiving Proof of Loss

Posted by Cliff J. Wilson on Sep 28th 2018

Oregon Case Law Update: Oregon Court of Appeals Provides Guidance on a PIP Insurer’s Duty to Promptly Pay PIP Benefits after Receiving Proof of Loss
Under Oregon’s no-fault personal injury protection (“PIP”) statute, insurers must provide certain benefits (e.g. medical expenses and wage loss) to insured drivers involved in car accidents, without regard to fault. In the case of PIP medical benefits, the statute requires that benefits must be paid “promptly” after receiving proof of loss. The statute also provides that PIP medical expenses are deemed “reasonable and necessary” unless the PIP insurer provides the medical provider notice of deni
Read more

Statute Requiring Automatic Revocation of Ex-Spouse’s Primary Beneficiary Designation In Life Insurance Policy Does Not Violate Contracts Clause Of The Constitution

Posted by Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on Aug 12th 2018

Statute Requiring Automatic Revocation of Ex-Spouse’s Primary Beneficiary Designation In Life Insurance Policy Does Not Violate Contracts Clause Of The Constitution
n Sveen v. Melin (No. 16-1432, filed June 11, 2018) (“Sveen”), the United States Supreme Court held that a statute which automatically revoked life insurance beneficiary designations following the policyholder’s divorce did not violate the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution. (U.S. Const. Art. I § 10, cl. 1.)In 2002, the Minnesota Legislature passed a statute that automatically revokes the designation of a spouse as the beneficiary of life insurance policy if the policy is purchas
Read more

Accident/Occurrence Requirement Does not Preclude Coverage for Vicarious Liability or Negligent Supervision

Posted by Law Firm of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on Aug 12th 2018

Accident/Occurrence Requirement Does not Preclude Coverage for Vicarious Liability or Negligent Supervision
In Liberty Surplus Ins. Corp. v. Ledesma & Meyer Construction Co., Inc. (No. S236765, filed 6/4/18) (L&M), the California Supreme Court ruled that the liability insurance requirement that injury be caused by an “occurrence,” defined as an “accident,” does not preclude coverage of an employer’s independent tort liability for injury deliberately caused by its employee.In L&M, Liberty insured a construction company that contracted to manage a construction project at a middle school in S
Read more

Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable

Posted by Law Firm of Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on Aug 12th 2018

Need and Prejudice: An Eleventh-Hour Trial Continuance Where A Key Witness Is Unexpectedly Unavailable
In Padda v. Superior Court (GI Excellence), No. E070522, the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, recently held that a trial court abused its discretion in denying Defendants/Cross-Complainants’ request for a trial continuance where their key expert witness suddenly became ill twelve days before trial and before his deposition had been taken.The case arose from an employment-related contract dispute between two Gastroenterologists (hereafter “Petitioners”) and Plaintiff/Cros
Read more