Search
Archives
Categories:
- Covid-19 (6)
- NJ - Agents and Administrators (16)
- NJ - Attorney Client Privilege (7)
- NJ - Attorney's Fees (27)
- NJ - Bifurcate/Sever & Stays (20)
- NJ - Choice/Conflict of Law (3)
- NJ - Claims Handling (general) (34)
- NJ - Claims Handling (reasonable) (15)
- NJ - Claims Handling (unreasonable) (11)
- NJ - Conflict of interest (1)
- NJ - Consumer Fraud Act (15)
- NJ - Cooperation with insurer (2)
- NJ - Coverage Issues (55)
- NJ - Damages (1)
- NJ - Declaratory Judgment (11)
- NJ - Delay (Insured) (4)
- NJ - Delay (Investigation/Claims handling) (13)
- NJ - Delay (Payment) (4)
- NJ - Discovery and Evidence (21)
- NJ - ERISA Preemption (7)
- NJ - Estimates, Valuation or Appraisal (9)
- NJ - Experts (12)
- NJ - Federal Pleading Adequate (8)
- NJ - Federal Pleading Inadequate (17)
- NJ - General Bad Faith and Litigation Issues (45)
- NJ - Law unsettled (7)
- NJ - Limitations Period (4)
- NJ - Litigation Conduct (1)
- NJ - Negligence not bad faith (15)
- NJ - No coverage due, no bad faith (25)
- NJ - No covereage duty, possible bad faith (1)
- NJ - Procedural Issues (42)
- NJ - Punitive Damages (14)
- NJ - Reinsurance (1)
- NJ - Removal & Remand (3)
- NJ - Reservation of Rights (4)
- NJ - Reverse Bad Faith (33)
- NJ - Settlement related issues (26)
- NJ - Standing, Assignment or Outside Scope (12)
- NJ - Sureties (3)
- NJ - Sworn Statement/EUO (2)
- NJ - UIM/UM Cases (15)
- NJ - Work Product (4)
- NJ -ITPA and UCSPA (16)
- PA - Agents and Administrators (44)
- PA - Attorney Client Privilege (48)
- PA - Attorney's Fees (55)
- PA - Bifurcate/Sever & Stays (63)
- PA - Choice/Conflict of Law (22)
- PA - Claims Handling (general) (154)
- PA - Claims Handling (reasonable) (167)
- PA - Claims Handling (unreasonable) (113)
- PA - Common Law Bad Faith (contractual or fiduciary basis) (149)
- PA - Communication with insured (64)
- PA - Conflict of Interest (9)
- PA - Cooperation with insurer (23)
- PA - Coverage Issues (185)
- PA - Damages (11)
- PA - Declaratory Judgment (34)
- PA - Delay (Insured) (37)
- PA - Delay (Investigation/Claims handling) (113)
- PA - Delay (Payment) (58)
- PA - Discovery and Evidence (178)
- PA - ERISA Preemption (34)
- PA - Estimates, Valuation or Appraisal (110)
- PA - Experts (102)
- PA - Federal Pleading Adequate (109)
- PA - Federal Pleading Inadequate (142)
- PA - General Bad Faith and Litigation Issues (100)
- PA - Insurer wrong, but reasonable (22)
- PA - Late notice (5)
- PA - Law unsettled (22)
- PA - Limitations Period (76)
- PA - Litigation Conduct Claims (35)
- PA - Manuals (27)
- PA - Mediation (15)
- PA - MVFRL (45)
- PA - Negligence not bad faith (55)
- PA - No coverage due, bad faith still possible (46)
- PA - No coverage duty, no bad faith (159)
- PA - Procedural Issues (114)
- PA - Punitive Damages (53)
- PA - Red flags during investigation (14)
- PA - Reinsurance (13)
- PA - Release of bad faith claim (10)
- PA - Removal & Remand (91)
- PA - Reservation of Rights (23)
- PA - Reserves (37)
- PA - Reverse Bad Faith (73)
- PA - Settlement related issues (117)
- PA - Standing, Assignment or Outside Scope (85)
- PA - Sureties (10)
- PA - Sworn Statement/EUO (31)
- PA - UIM/UM Cases (349)
- PA - UIPA & UCSP (80)
- PA - Underwriting (14)
- PA - UTPCPL (42)
- PA - Venue (15)
- PA - Who is an Insurer? (30)
- PA - Work Product (37)
Links of Note
- Advice of Counsel Discovery (Dec. 2012)
- Article: What is the Nature and Scope of the "Bad Faith" Conduct that can be Remedied Directly Under the Bad Faith Statute (2014)
- Business Courts Blog
- Fineman Krekstein & Harris, Philadelphia Insurance Bad Faith and Coverage Lawyers
- New Jersey Fraud Prevention Act
- NJ Unfair Insurance Practices Statute
- Pennsylvania Insurance Fraud Statute
- Post Koken Scorecard in UM/UIM Cases - Tort Talk (Pennsylvania Tort Law Blog)
- Searching on this Blog
- Toy v Metropolitan
- Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Law
- Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Regs
Subscribe by Email
Signup to receive e-mail notifications about future blog posts.
0 Responses to “2014 SEPTEMBER BAD FAITH CASES: COURT RULES THAT ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY WHERE ATTORNEY ACTS AS A CLAIMS INVESTIGATOR; BUT REJECTS THE INSURED’S “THEORY OF WHOLESALE WAIVER” WHERE INSURER DENIES ACTING IN BAD FAITH IN ANSWER AND WHERE LEGAL OPINION AFFECTS ADJUSTER’S MIND, IN ABSENCE OF ADVICE OF COUNSEL DEFENSE; AND GENERAL ADMONITION THAT EACH REDACTED ITEM MUST BE ANALYZED INDIVIDUALLY BY COUNSEL (Philadelphia Federal)”