About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2018 through August 2019)

handle is hein.ali/aliliabil9925 and id is 1 raw text is: LIABILITY INSURANCE CHAPTER 2. MANAGMEENT OF POTENTIALLY INSURED LIABILITY CLAIMS TOPIC 1. DEFENSE § 13. Conditions Under Which the Insurer Must Defend Nev.2018. Com. (c) quot. in ftn. (quoting § 13, com. (c), of Prop. Final Draft No. 2, 2018, which is now § 13, com. (c) of the Official Text). Pedestrian and pedestrian's legal guardian brought a lawsuit against truck driver, driver's personal insurer, and driver's commercial insurer, alleging that truck driver caused pedestrian's injuries; commercial liability insurer refused to defend truck driver, arguing that truck driver was not acting within the scope of his commercial duties at the time of the accident. The district court entered default judgment against defendants. After defendants appeared in court, the trial court stayed proceedings to submit a certified question to this court as to whether an insurer, who had breached a contract but did not breach the duty of good faith, would be liable for damages beyond the insurance policy's limit. This court answered in the affirmative, holding that an insurer who refused to defend an insured could be liable for all consequential damages arising from the insurer's refusal to defend. The court cited Restatement of Liability Insurance § 13 (Prop. Final Draft No. 2, 2018) in noting that, although an insurer generally could not use facts outside the complaint as a basis for refusing to defend, it could use such facts after defending the insured. Century Surety Company v. Andrew, 432 P.3d 180, 186. CHAPTER 4. ENFORCEABILITY AND REMEDIES TOPIC 2. REMEDIES § 48. Damages for Breach of a Liability Insurance Policy Nev.2018. Cit. in disc. (citing § 48 of Prop. Final Draft No. 2, 2018, which is now § 48 of the Official Text). Pedestrian and pedestrian's legal guardian brought a lawsuit against truck driver, driver's personal insurer, and driver's commercial insurer, alleging that truck driver caused pedestrian's injuries; commercial liability insurer refused to defend truck driver, arguing that truck driver was not acting within the scope of his commercial duties at the time of the accident. The district court entered default judgment against defendants. After defendants appeared in court, the trial court stayed proceedings to submit a certified question to this court as to whether an insurer, who had breached a contract but did not breach the duty of good faith, would be liable for damages beyond the insurance policy's limit. This court answered in the affirmative, holding that an insurer who refused to defend an insured could be liable for all consequential damages arising from the insurer's refusal to defend. The court cited Restatement of Liability Insurance § 48 (Prop. Final Draft No. 2, 2018) in explaining that insurance policies were contracts, and that, in general, a party who breached a contract was liable for all consequential losses resulting from the breach. Century Surety Company v. Andrew, 432 P.3d 180, 186. COPYRIGHT 02019 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most