Law Commons^™

Illegal Discrimination In Health Insurance, Senate Committee On Insurance, Claims And Corporations

California Senate

No abstract provided.

Banking And Insurance - Should Ever The Twain Meet?, Emeric Fischer

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Reinsurance: Bad Faith Considerations And Insolvency Dilemma, Hui-Ju Hsieh

LLM Theses and Essays

Reinsurance is insurance that an insurance company purchases from another insurance company. The original insurance company is called the reinsured, and the insurance company that is contracted is called the reinsurer. The main purpose of reinsurance is to disperse or spread the risk of loss. The reinsurance relationship is frequently characterized as an exercise of fiduciary responsibility based upon an undertaking of utmost good faith between contracting parties. However, disputes arise; most litigation involving reinsurance has been between reinsurers and persons not party to the reinsurance agreement. This paper’s first major area of discussion is the relationship between the reinsurer …

Judicial Bias, The Insurance Industry And Consumer Protection: An Empirical Analysis Of State Supreme Courts’ Bad-Faith, Breach-Of-Contract, Breach-Of-Covenant-Of-Good-Faith And Excess-Judgment Decisions, 1900–1991, Willy E. Rice

Faculty Articles

Consumers are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the services and products that the American insurance industry provides. Correspondingly, they are filing an ever-increasing number of lawsuits against insurers in state courts. While courts have ruled equally in favor of insurers and policyholders, advocates for both consumers and the insurance industry strongly believe “judicial bias” or “judicial hostility” permeates state supreme courts.

Some United States Supreme Court Justices have argued that state supreme courts are hostile towards insurance carriers. Commentators have also viciously criticized state supreme courts for being biased against insurance carriers. The contrary view that state supreme courts are anti-consumer …

Case Comment: Smyth V. Szep Unsettling Settlements: Of Unconscionability And Other Things, David Vaver

Articles & Book Chapters

The recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal in Smyth v. Szep once again canvasses the validity of releases signed by injured victims in favour of insurance companies and once again plunges into the murky waters of contractual unconscionability. Both issues have become more or less permanent squatters on judicial calendars throughout North America, and it seems worthwhile to consider why this is so and whether something can be done to reduce their tenure at least in Canada.

The Economics And Politics Of Emergency Health Care For The Poor: The Patient Dumping Dilemma, Maria O'Brien

Faculty Scholarship

As the numbers of uninsured mount⁴ because of job dislocations, exhaustion of benefits, and unaffordably high premiums, the incidence of "dumping" by private hospitals is, predictably, on the rise. Dumping occurs when a hospital, in violation of federal or state law, transfers an emergency patient to another (usually public) hospital or simply refuses any treatment based on the patient's inability to pay.5 In addition to the completely uninsured, favorite dumping targets include Medicare and Medicaid patients, AIDS patients, and cancer patients whose therapy may cost more than the maximum reimbursement under private insurance.

Dumping is merely a part of …