Ninth Circuit: Excess Insurers Must Tread Carefully When Rejecting Demands Exceeding Primary Limits

Under California law, a liability insurer has a good faith duty to reasonably settle claims within its policy limits. In Diamond Heights Homeowners Association v. National American Insurance Co., the California Court of Appeal held that where a proposed settlement demand exceeds a defending primary insurer’s limits and has been approved by the insured and the primary insurer, an excess insurer has three options: (1) approve the proposed settlement; (2) reject it and assume the insured’s defense; or (3) reject it and face a potential lawsuit from the insured. 227 Cal.App.3d 563, 580-581 (1991). The rationale for this rule is that the excess insurer cannot force the primary insurer to continue defending a case that should resolve within the excess insurer’s limits.   Read the article………….


Related Articles

Riverdale Peaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co

Riverdale Peaks Homeowners Ass’n v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co., No.11-cv-01920-WJM-MJW, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54180 (D. Colo. Apr. 18, 2012) An exclusion

AB 2273: Resecuring HOA Assessment Streams from Foreclosed Properties

Homeowners Association (“HOA”) Boards and industry professionals are keenly aware of the financial impact that the economic downturn has had

(CA) Court Rejects Challenge to Rental Restriction in CC&Rs Amendment and Awards Attorneys’ Fees to Association

In an unpublished opinion, the California Court of Appeal for the Third District ruled in favor of an association when