Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Contracts (5)
- Legal Remedies (4)
- Litigation (4)
- Torts (4)
- Health Law and Policy (3)
-
- Jurisprudence (3)
- Transportation Law (3)
- Commercial Law (2)
- Law and Economics (2)
- Securities Law (2)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (2)
- Administrative Law (1)
- Admiralty (1)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- Arts and Humanities (1)
- Behavioral Economics (1)
- Civil Law (1)
- Civil Procedure (1)
- Consumer Protection Law (1)
- Courts (1)
- Dispute Resolution and Arbitration (1)
- Economics (1)
- Health Policy (1)
- History (1)
- International Law (1)
- Jurisdiction (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Legal Profession (1)
- Institution
- Publication
-
- Pepperdine Law Review (6)
- All Faculty Scholarship (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Christopher C. French (1)
- Faculty Scholarship (1)
-
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (1)
- Joseph P. Bauer (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (1)
- Legal History Publications (1)
- Matthew J. Barrett (1)
- Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal (1)
- Peter Siegelman (1)
- UF Law Faculty Publications (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 19 of 19
Full-Text Articles in Insurance Law
Application Of The Antitrust Laws To The Activities Of Insurance Companies: Heavier Risks, Expanded Coverage, And Greater Liability, Joseph Bauer, Earl W. Kintner, Michael J. Allen
Application Of The Antitrust Laws To The Activities Of Insurance Companies: Heavier Risks, Expanded Coverage, And Greater Liability, Joseph Bauer, Earl W. Kintner, Michael J. Allen
Joseph P. Bauer
Since 1945 Congress has exempted certain activities of insurance companies from federal antitrust scrutiny. This exemption, provided by the McCarran-Ferguson Act, is not unqualified; it only applies to insurance company activities that constitute the "business of insurance" and that already are regulated under state law. Moreover, the exemption does not apply to activities that involve boycotts, coercion, or intimidation. The purpose of this exemption was to preserve the long tradition of state regulation of insurance, while providing federal remedies for coercive anticompetitive activities. The authors examine recent Supreme Court interpretations of the Act in light of this legislative policy and …
Miller V. Commissioner: Deductibility Of Casualty Losses After Voluntary Election Not To File An Insurance Claim, Stephen J. Dunn, Robert H. Kurnick, Matthew J. Barrett
Miller V. Commissioner: Deductibility Of Casualty Losses After Voluntary Election Not To File An Insurance Claim, Stephen J. Dunn, Robert H. Kurnick, Matthew J. Barrett
Matthew J. Barrett
Taxpayers who suffer casualty losses may decide, for a variety of reasons, not to file an insurance claim for recovery of those losses. Section 165 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 allows a deduction for “any loss sustained during the taxable year and not compensated for by insurance or otherwise.”' Consequently, the question arises whether a taxpayer may claim a casualty loss deduction even though the taxpayer did not seek insurance reimbursement for the loss. In Miller v. Commissioner, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in a 6-5 en banc decision, expressly overruled its previous …
The Iowa Unemployment Appeals Telephone Hearing Process, Bruce Graham
The Iowa Unemployment Appeals Telephone Hearing Process, Bruce Graham
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
No abstract provided.
Enough About The Constitution: How States Can Regulate Health Insurance Under The Aca, Brendan S. Maher, Radha A. Pathak
Enough About The Constitution: How States Can Regulate Health Insurance Under The Aca, Brendan S. Maher, Radha A. Pathak
Faculty Scholarship
Last term, the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act in a landmark decision. It is a forceful reminder that America’s oldest question — how power should be shared between federal and state sovereigns — retains powerful political salience. Critics have reflexively attacked the decision as an assault on states’ rights, while supporters have celebrated the result. Regrettably, insufficient attention has been paid to how, in actuality, health care regulatory authority has been and will be divided between federal and state governments. In this Article, we fill that gap. To do so, we apply “federalism-in-fact,” …
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Punitive Damages And The Drunken Driver, William C. Cooper
Pepperdine Law Review
A discussion of the history and theory of punitive damages which results in advocating their application in a drunk driving context after giving due consideration to the pros and cons of such a sanction. An analysis of case law will reveal the underlying rationale that has motivated certain jurisdictions in applying this severe penal approach in an attempt to deter and curtail the senseless destruction on our nation's highways as well as exploring the impetus behind those other jurisdictions that do not utilize the remedy of punitive damages. The culminating focus is on California's position in this regard. Finally, there …
When "Yes" Means "No": Mccarran-Ferguson, The New York Convention, And The Limits Of Congressional Assent, Aaron L. Wells
When "Yes" Means "No": Mccarran-Ferguson, The New York Convention, And The Limits Of Congressional Assent, Aaron L. Wells
Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal
The article focuses on the awards and arbitration of the resolution of the international commercial disputes with respect to the cross-border contracts and agreements. The enactment of the McCarran-Ferguson Act of the U.S. was for the prevention of the general applicability of the federal legislation in the authority of the states for the purpose of regulating the insurance industry. Information on the decision of the Supreme Court of the U.S. regarding this issue is also presented.
Liability Cure-All For Insidious Disease Claims, Susan Frankewich
Liability Cure-All For Insidious Disease Claims, Susan Frankewich
Pepperdine Law Review
Recent decisions handed down in various circuits have created virtual chaos in predicting the liability and damage amounts of insidious disease claims. At least three substantially divergent theories have been adopted to impute liability to the manufacturers of the disease catalysts. Additionally, a new trust fund concept has been used on a limited basis to reconcile differences in court decisions. The trust fund approach is relatively flexible and simple to apply in apportioning damages for insidious disease claims. The author examines and analyzes these three liability theories. In conclusion, the adoption of the trust fund concept is recommended.
Reasonable Expectations: Seeking A Principled Application, William A. Mayhew
Reasonable Expectations: Seeking A Principled Application, William A. Mayhew
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Interpreting The Recently Enacted California Underinsurance Provisions Of The Uninsured Motorist Statute, Linda M. Schmidt
Interpreting The Recently Enacted California Underinsurance Provisions Of The Uninsured Motorist Statute, Linda M. Schmidt
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Overruling Of Royal Globe: A "Royal Bonanza" For Insurance Companies, But What Happens Now?, Michael J. Gainer
The Overruling Of Royal Globe: A "Royal Bonanza" For Insurance Companies, But What Happens Now?, Michael J. Gainer
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
It Hertz To Be Number One: The Collision Damage Waiver Is Being Attacked On Multiple Fronts , Michael G. Dawson
It Hertz To Be Number One: The Collision Damage Waiver Is Being Attacked On Multiple Fronts , Michael G. Dawson
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Segmented Settlements Are Not The Answer: A Response To Professor Squire’S Article, How Collective Settlements Camouflage The Costs Of Shareholder Lawsuits, Christopher C. French
Segmented Settlements Are Not The Answer: A Response To Professor Squire’S Article, How Collective Settlements Camouflage The Costs Of Shareholder Lawsuits, Christopher C. French
Journal Articles
In his recent article, Professor Richard Squire offers a provocative theory in which he claims the underlying claimants in shareholder litigation against corporate policyholders are overcompensated due to what he describes as “cramdown” settlements, under which insurers are forced to settle due to the “duty to contribute” that arises under multi-layered directors and officers (“D&O”) insurance programs. He also offers a novel idea regarding how this problem could be fixed by what he refers to as “segmented” settlements in which each insurer and the policyholder would be allowed to settle separately and consider only its own interests in doing so. …
Issues Of Delay & Deviation In Marine Insurance: A Case Study Of Oliver V. The Maryland Insurance Company, 7 Cranach 487 (1813), Kyle Hildreth
Issues Of Delay & Deviation In Marine Insurance: A Case Study Of Oliver V. The Maryland Insurance Company, 7 Cranach 487 (1813), Kyle Hildreth
Legal History Publications
An examination of the case Oliver v. The Maryland Insurance Company, 7 Cranch 487 (1813). In Oliver, Robert Oliver, the plaintiff, sued the Maryland Insurance Company, the defendant, in an attempt to recover on an insurance policy he had purchased for a shipment of goods aboard the snow Comet. The Comet was seized by a British ship on its return from Spain, and was condemned under the Orders in Council of 1807. The Court affirmed a lower court judgment that Oliver was not entitled to recover, because the Comet had engaged in an unreasonable delay and deviation …
Amendments To Federal Removal Statutes: Curtailing Adjudication Of Diversity Cases Or Bad Faith Causes Of Action?, Brooke M. Gaffney
Amendments To Federal Removal Statutes: Curtailing Adjudication Of Diversity Cases Or Bad Faith Causes Of Action?, Brooke M. Gaffney
Barry Law Review
This student comment explores the problem facing Florida insurers preventing them from exercising their right to litigate bad faith causes of action in federal court. This article demonstrates how the federal removal statutes, and amendments thereto, have potentially precluded insurers from removing some bad faith actions from state to federal court under diversity jurisdiction. This article details the divergence in opinion among Florida’s Southern and Middle District Courts in interpreting the federal removal statutes and concludes with a prediction of how the split may be resolved by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
Retiree Out-Of-Pocket Healthcare Spending: A Study Of Consumer Expectations And Policy Implications, Allison K. Hoffman, Howell E. Jackson
Retiree Out-Of-Pocket Healthcare Spending: A Study Of Consumer Expectations And Policy Implications, Allison K. Hoffman, Howell E. Jackson
All Faculty Scholarship
Even though most American retirees benefit from Medicare coverage, a mounting body of research predicts that many will face large and increasing out-of-pocket expenditures for healthcare costs in retirement and that many already struggle to finance these costs. It is unclear, however, whether the general population understands the likely magnitude of these out-of-pocket expenditures well enough to plan for them effectively. This study is the first comprehensive examination of Americans’ expectations regarding their out-of-pocket spending on healthcare in retirement. We surveyed over 1700 near retirees and retirees to assess their expectations regarding their own spending and then compared their responses …
Employer Costs And Conflicts Under The Affordable Care Act, Peter Molk
Employer Costs And Conflicts Under The Affordable Care Act, Peter Molk
UF Law Faculty Publications
In January 2015, qualified employers must provide health care coverage under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 or face a fine. As employers actively attempt to minimize the costs that they will incur, the possibility emerges that employers will retaliate against or harass employees who seek coverage. This Essay discusses the protections for employees under the law and the possible deficiencies in the law. It shows that employers and employees often have contrasting incentives – employers to avoid coverage, and employees to take coverage – and these incentives may result in employer harassment and retaliation of employees. …
Distinguishing Probability Weighting From Risk Misperceptions In Field Data, Levon Barseghyan, Francesca Molinari, Ted O'Donoghue, Joshua C. Teitelbaum
Distinguishing Probability Weighting From Risk Misperceptions In Field Data, Levon Barseghyan, Francesca Molinari, Ted O'Donoghue, Joshua C. Teitelbaum
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
The paper outlines a strategy for distinguishing rank-dependent probability weighting from systematic risk misperceptions in field data. Our strategy relies on singling out a field environment with two key properties: (i) the objects of choice are money lotteries with more than two outcomes and (ii) the ranking of outcomes differs across lotteries. We first present an abstract model of risky choice that elucidates the identification problem and our strategy. The model has numerous applications, including insurance choices and gambling. We then consider the application of insurance deductible choices and illustrate our strategy using simulated data.
The Law & Economics Of Liability Insurance, Tom Baker, Peter Siegelman
The Law & Economics Of Liability Insurance, Tom Baker, Peter Siegelman
Peter Siegelman
No abstract provided.
Segmented Settlements Are Not The Answer: A Response To Professor Squire’S Article, How Collective Settlements Camouflage The Costs Of Shareholder Lawsuits, Christopher C. French
Segmented Settlements Are Not The Answer: A Response To Professor Squire’S Article, How Collective Settlements Camouflage The Costs Of Shareholder Lawsuits, Christopher C. French
Christopher C. French
In his recent article, Professor Richard Squire offers a provocative theory in which he claims the underlying claimants in shareholder litigation against corporate policyholders are overcompensated due to what he describes as “cramdown” settlements, under which insurers are forced to settle due to the “duty to contribute” that arises under multi-layered directors and officers (“D&O”) insurance programs. He also offers a novel idea regarding how this problem could be fixed by what he refers to as “segmented” settlements in which each insurer and the policyholder would be allowed to settle separately and consider only its own interests in doing so. …