Progressive Casualty Insurance Case Summary

Did Farm Bureau Life Insurance Company, LabOne, and Dr. J. Alexander Lowden have a duty to inform Gary and Renna Pehle that they were HIV-positive?

The main issue of this case is to determine if Tricontinental may recover from PwC for negligence. In order to show negligence there must be four requirements that the plaintiff must show. The four requirements are: the defendant owed a duty of care, defendant breached that duty, breach of duty to care caused the plaintiff’s injury, and fourth that damages resulted.

Plaintiff’s allegations must show that Maloney’s behavior was sufficient to prove he is liable. Maloney’s commissions for the sale of insurance policies are insufficient evidence that he acted

Prior to the accident, Plaintiff purchased a disability insurance policy (the “Policy”) from Defendant Common Insurance Company in New Amsterdam which provided issued insurance policy to Plaintiff.

above to the insured named herein and that, subject to their provisions and conditions, such policies afford

In July 1997, Geneva Hager, an Allstate policyholder was involved in a rear end auto accident resulting in neck and back injuries. The claimant’s auto insurance paid out to Allstate and Ms Hager, his policy limit of 25,000 for body injury. Therefore in December 1999, her claim was closed with Allstate and her

The costs associated with the litigation filed by Beth Smiles Company against the denial of the insurance claim settlement of the death of her business partner due to accident which made the company eligible to a double indemnification went through the roof because of the number of depositions made by the lawyers of the insurance company. This was done to pressurize the small company like Environ- vision to give up the litigation and accept the offer of $100,000 initially made to the company. Moreover, since, the company Environ- vision was the plaintiff it had to show substantial proof that the death of its partner was accidental while the insurance company had to proof that it was suicide committed by the man in order to avoid a claim of

My firm represents the Factory Mutual Insurance Company (“FM Global”) and the University of Maryland Medical System (“UMMS”) regarding the above-referenced subrogation matter. FM Global has asked that we pursue recovery of the damages sustained as a result of a loss that occurred on October 11, 2015, at 22 South Greene Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21201 (the “Property”). The loss was the direct and proximate result of Skanska USA Building, Inc.’s (“Skanska’s”) faulty installation of a fire suppression installation system at the Property.

In Stephens, Plaintiff procured an insurance policy covering loss from property damage on a building it owned from Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. Three days after the policy became effective, Plaintiff discovered the property had sustained substantial damage from burglars who had stripped the property of electrical and conductive materials. Plaintiff thereafter sought reimbursement for the damage. The insurer delayed resolving the claim resulting in Plaintiff filing suit. The insurer never formally accepted or denied coverage until five years after the claim when one month before trial is denied coverage.

This Case relates to Fortuitous happenings because the insurance company had tried make its claim stating that the Plaintiff had no coverage due to lack of the accident happening out of accident but instead happening out of his own fault. Though they were right, the Judge still found that the Plaintiff had tried to save his boat and that under a different clause still covered under the insurance policy he had with the company, is still covered.

Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance Company that the insurer-insured relationship “is not a true ‘fiduciary relationship’ in the same sense as the relationship between trustee and beneficiary, or attorney and client.” The Court went on to state that any special or additional duties applicable to the broker or agent were only the result of the unique nature of the insurance contract, and “not because the insurer is a fiduciary.” The Court in Hydromill applied the concept in Vu, finding that if an insurer does not owe fiduciary duties, then a broker and agent could

Protective will not hesitate to make the necessary changes in order to continue to produce a quality claims product. Protective’s willingness to change the PBG’s demonstrates they are not willing to identify shortcomings in their operation and make the required

The journal article, “INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR BUSINESS TORT CLAIMS ALLEGING INTENTIONAL WRONGDOING” was published to show the rights that insurance companies have regarding denying people coverage. Sectors thesis statement is as follows, “Like the punter who kicks the ball too far, the business litigation plaintiff sometimes pleads or proves that the defendant was not merely negligent, but reckless, intentional, or malicious” (Spector, 2015. Para. 2). One example used by Larry Spector, the author, is about a kicker on a football team. If the insurance company finds an incident where the insured persons has been negligent then the company can “out kick” the coverage that they first quoted the individual with (Spector, 2015). The two main points of the article are, public policy

SureCo, Inc., would be defendant in a suit brought on by the policy owners but because of the principal/agent relationship, more specifically the duty to perform, Franco would also be a defendant in a case brought on by SureCo, Inc., for being compensated for the money

Engendering a vast array of undesirable outcomes, including setting into motion a host of unpredictable collateral damage akin to falling dominoes, one poorly orchestrated strategic decision gone awry can have far-reaching effects. Even the best-laid plans can become casualties of immitigable disruption, disaster or destruction. And for this reason, the insurance industry retains significant influence around the globe by fiscally protecting people and entities on a broad range of applications covering healthcare, infrastructure, intellectual property and even errors made by third-parties. Part of risk mitigation strategies, insurances serve their customers well as an indemnifier. However, they don’t guarantee an outcome. Nor would they somehow reverse devouring years of someone’s life, destroying their