(Insurer Subrogation Action Against Subcontractors Required Jury Trial To Determine Damages And Such Damages Were Properly Allocated to Breaching Subcontractors On A Several Basis)

Many states allow insurers to recover case costs once a court determines that they had no duty to defend a policy holder, but only where certain conditions are met. In a recent 4-3 decision, the Nevada Supreme Court held that where an insurer pays to defend a policyholder against a lawsuit and that defense is ultimately not owed, the insurer is entitled to reimbursement of its defense costs, even where the insurance policy contains no reservation of rights.

Arizona courts continue to address the interplay between the parties’ competing duties, such as an insurer’s duty to defend, the insurer’s duty to indemnify, and the insured’s duty to cooperate. Where an insurer seeks a reservation of rights, Arizona courts reason that these duties paint an insured into a corner where they should be able to settle third-party claims.

New Mexico courts continue to require insurance companies to afford insureds a fair opportunity to consider the actual cost of UM/UIM coverage by reforming policies that do not accurately reflect premium costs corresponding to available levels of UM/UIM coverage.

(Bad Faith Action Dismissed as Plaintiff Was Not an Insured and Had No Insurable Interest in Home Covered by Property Policy)

(Insurer’s Anti-SLAPP Motion Denied Based on Alleged Fraud in Connection With Settlement of Claims)

(Certified Question to California Supreme Court Regarding Whether Commercial Auto Policy Continues In Force, Absent Notice to DMV of Cancellation of Certificate of Insurance)

(California Insurance Code Section 5335(b) Bars Defense of Insured for Action Brought by the Attorney General’s Office for Violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law and False advertising Law)