The tort of bad faith: leaving insurers defenseless
Article Abstract:
Insurers have always been subject to contractual obligations, which, if broken, could result in the payment of contractual damages. However, the Restatement (Second) of Contracts also imposes an obligation of good faith on insurers, leaving them exposed to tort liability as well. The Restatement is design to empower the insured in claims against their insurers, but it does so to an extreme. Attorneys defending insurers are having to rely on a variety of common law defenses and limitations of action to protect their clients from such bad faith claims.
Publication Name: South Texas Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 1052-343X
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
ERISA litigant need not show bad faith by opposing party to get attorneys' fees in preemption removal case
Article Abstract:
A US district court in Alabama found in Gray v. New York Life Insurance Co. that attorneys' fees could be awarded under 28 U.S.C. 1447(c) for failure to succeed on a removal attempt without a demonstration of bad faith. The defendant had sought to remove a state insurance fraud case to federal court because ERISA preemption was alleged. The court characterized the award of attorneys' fees as a cost imposed on the moving party to ensure that the party assesses the likelihood of the motion's success.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Fifth Circuit joins other circuits in holding that arbitration clauses apply to ERISA claims
Article Abstract:
The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in Kramer v. Smith Barney that claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) could be subject arbitration clauses. The Court also found that the statute of limitations under ERISA preempted the clause in the agreement requiring arbitration that set the statute of limitations at six years. The Court found that Congress had not intended to exempt ERISA claims from arbitration consistent with the Federal Arbitration Act.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: The formation of the family limited partnership: fraudulent transfer liability and other family problems. Future creditors and fraudulent transfers: when a claimant doesn't have a claim, when a transfer isn't a transfer, when fraud doesn't stay fradulent, and other important limits to fraudulent transfers law for the asset protection planner
- Abstracts: The regulation of health care professionals other than physicians. The dilemmas of international financial regulation
- Abstracts: The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in insurance contracts in Delaware. Japan's new product liability law: the citadel of strict liability falls, but access to recovery is limited by formidable barriers
- Abstracts: ADEA awards: a Supreme Court issue. Supreme Court mulls individual right to action under ERISA. OFCCP affirmative action awards and stock market reaction
- Abstracts: Moore v. The Regents of the University of California: an ethical debate on informed consent and property rights in a patient's cells