California Court Holds No Affirmative Duty to Settle Based Solely on the Likelihood of an Excess Judgment

By Ryan C. Tuley , William D. Burger, Jr. , and Christina Y. Ahn On October 7, 2013, the California Court of Appeal, in Reid v. Mercury Insurance Company [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ], held that an insurer does not have an affirmative duty to settle based solely on the...

Ten Most Significant Insurance Coverage Decisions Of 2013 – Alaska Supreme Court: Demand To Settle For Limits, But Not For All Insureds, Insurer Between A Rock And A Hard Case

It is the proverbial “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” situation for insurers. An insurer is presented with a policy limits demand to settle for one insured – and it should be accepted based on liability and damages considerations -- but the settlement offered will not...