Insurance
Sep. 19, 2007
Refusing Defense
Insurers who refuse to defend a third-party lawsuit are putting their pocketbooks on the line, as illustrated by three recent decisions.
Rex Heeseman
JAMS
555 W 5th St Fl 32
Los Angeles , CA 90013-1055
Phone: (213) 253-9772
Fax: (213) 620-0100
Email: rheeseman@jamsdar.com
Stanford Univ Law School
Rex Heeseman retired from the Los Angeles Count Superior Court bench in 2014. He is at JAMS, Los Angeles. Besides speaking at various MCLE programs, he co-authors The Rutter Group's practice guide on "Insurance Litigation." From 2002 to 2015, he was an adjunct professor at Loyola Law School.
By Rex Heeseman
Three recent decisions illustrate the potential bad-faith consequences (such as a sizable jury award) of a refusal to defend a third-party lawsuit. Conversely, Hamilton v. Maryland Cas. Co., 27 Cal.4th 718 (2002), highlights the advantages of defending, as well as putting the dangers of refusing to defend in sharper relief.
Abandonment's Dangers
...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In