Skip to Content

Bad Faith Blog

We cover current issues, highlights and best practices exclusively on claims of bad faith and extra contractual damages.

Bad Faith Blog
June 19, 2018

Under Florida Law Court Agrees the Insured and the Insured’s Attorney’s Conduct Are Relevant to Bad Faith

An insured motorist who sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident brought a first party bad faith action alleging the automobile insurer acted in bad faith in attempting to settle the claim for underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits. The district court granted summary judgment for the insurer; however, the Eleventh Circuit held that although actions of the insured or the insured’s lawyer were part of the “totality of circumstances” to be considered in bad faith claims, there were factual issues that still existed precluding summary judgment.

Bad Faith Blog
July 6, 2017

New Missouri Law Levels The Playing Field For Insurers

On April 26, 2017, the Missouri General Assembly passed a bill modifying certain statutory provisions relating to settlement of tort claims. The bill, known as HB 339 and HB 714, grants certain rights to insurers when a claimant and tortfeasor enter into a contract to limit recovery pursuant to R.S.Mo. § 537.065 and imposes new requirements on time-limited demands in R.S.Mo. § 537.058. Governor Greitens signed the bill on July 5, 2017 and it will be effective August 28, 2017. This legislation is designed to limit currently legal, but abusive, practices against insurers in an effort to reform insurance “bad faith” litigation in Missouri.

Bad Faith Blog
October 13, 2016

Wisconsin Supreme Court: When Subrogating Insurers Aren’t Required to Make Insureds Whole

Summary: Dufour, a motorcyclist insured by Dairyland Insurance Company, was seriously injured while riding his motorcycle, collected full policy limits from the tortfeasor for his bodily injuries and full property damage (PD) and underinsured (UIM) bodily injury (BI) limits from Dairyland, and then sued Dairyland for bad faith when it refused to pay him the property damage subrogation funds Dairyland collected from the tortfeasor’s insurer. The trial court granted summary judgment to Dufour on his breach of contract claim, but in favor of Dairyland on the bad faith claim finding it had not unreasonably withheld the funds from Dufour. The Court of Appeals affirmed the breach of contract award, but reversed on the bad faith claim holding Dairyland had acted in bad faith due to its made whole doctrine obligations and remanded to determine the bad faith damages. The Wisconsin Supreme Court reversed on both counts.