Insurance Law Commons^™

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. V. Hansen, 131 Nev. Adv. Op. 74 (Sept. 24, 2015), Kristen Matteoni

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

Under Nevada law, an insurer is required to provide independent counsel of the insured choosing when a conflict of interest arises between the insured and the insurer. A reservation of rights fails to create a per se conflict of interest. Instead, the courts must analyze on a case-by-case basis whether an actual conflict exists. Only if an actual conflict exists, must an insurer be obligated to provide the insured with independent counsel.

Introduction: Favorite Insurance Cases Symposium, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Introduction: Favorite Insurance Cases Symposium, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Insurance law scholars and teachers sometimes feel, with a mixture of paranoia and justification, that insurance law simply does not receive its proper respect in the hierarchy of legal education and law generally.

Consider the law school curriculum. In none of America’s nearly 200 ABA-approved law schools in insurance law a required course. Nor is it considered a course that, although not required, prudent students “must” be sure to take before they graduate (e.g. Evidence, Corporations). Enrollments may be respectable but the class is seldom oversubscribed, even where the law school is located in an insurance hub city. Although other …

Timeless And Ahead Of Its Time: Lach's V. Fidelity & Casualty Of New York, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The publication of Judge Keeton's important article “inventing” the reasonable expectations doctrine in 1971 is notable for infusing a good deal of intellectual energy into the study of insurance law, particularly judicial decisions about insurance coverage. Keeton's article, which deduced from cases the principle that courts tended to interpret policies to vindicate the objectively reasonable expectations of the insured, has rightly been viewed as a milestone. It clarified an area of law long seen as inconsistent or result-oriented. It spurred additional important scholarship in the area and elevated insurance caselaw from something of a backwater to at least a respectable …

Judge-Made Insurance That Was Not On The Menu: Schmidt V. Smith And The Confluence Of Text, Expectation, And Public Policy In The Realm Of Employment Practices Liability, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

In Schmidt v. Smith, the New Jersey Supreme Court caught more than a few observers by surprise. New Jersey courts have generally issued opinions regarded as pro-claimant and pro-policyholders. But everyone's taste for recompense and coverage has limits. In Schmidt, the court exceeded those limits for many observers by holding that despite what it regarded as clear contract language in an exclusion, an insurer providing Employers’ Liability (“EL”) coverage along with Workers' Compensation (“WC”) insurance for the employer was required to provide coverage in a case of blatant sexual harassment bordering on criminal assault. In doing so, the Schmidt court, …

Unreason In Action: A Case Study In The Wrong Approach To Construing The Liability Insurance Pollution Exclusion, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

For more than twenty-five years, a significant component of the scholarly commentary on insurance law has focused on the so-called “reasonable expectations doctrine” enunciated by then-Professor (now Judge) Robert Keeton in his justly celebrated 1970 article. The reasonable expectations principle made a seemingly sudden emergence with the appearance of Keeton's article and has held particular attraction to academics while simultaneously prompting resistance from elements of the bench and bar, and particularly from the insurance industry. The doctrine's life to date can be described as one of early growth followed by subsequent retreat and dilution, with continuing controversy.

However, despite the …

Principles Of Insurance Coverage: A Guide For The Employment Lawyer, Francis J. Mootz Iii

Scholarly Works

Employment lawyers have witnessed a virtual revolution in the law of employment relations during the past thirty years. Although the federal government intervened substantially in private employment relationships in response to the economic catastrophe of the Great Depression, employers remained largely free of regulation until the explosion of statutes and common law developments that commenced in the 1960s and continues today. Recent developments in common law tort and contract principles are particularly troubling for defense counsel in employment matters, since the resulting doctrinal uncertainty renders it difficult to assess the client's exposure with any assurance until the appeals in the …

Interpreting Insurance Policies, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Like any other contract, an insurance policy may become the subject of a legal dispute. When disputes arise over insurance coverage, lawyers must combine their skill in contract interpretation with their knowledge of insurance law, bringing both to bear on the special problems related to this type of contract. Each dispute has unique traits, but a few basic ground rules of contract law and insurance law can help you interpret insurance policies and resolve disputes over insurance coverage.