This document discusses various topics related to bad faith claims and class actions. It addresses how insureds owe insurers a duty to meet certain standards, and how insureds can have their bad faith claims barred if they breach this duty and interfere with claims handling. It also discusses the elements required for a class action, including numerosity, commonality, and typicality. Two specific class action cases are mentioned - Kartman v. State Farm and Oravsky v. Encompass Insurance Co.
1 of 10
Download to read offline
More Related Content
US Law Fall 2011 Client Conference Power Point Bad Faith And Class Actions
1. Bad Faith and Class Actions Daniel W. Gerber Goldberg Segalla LLP [email_address]
2. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 Reverse Bad Faith Insured owes insurer duty to meet certain standards. Insured breached duty – interfered with claims handling. Insurer’s ability to adjust claim interfered with. Insured’s bad faith claim barred. Apportion Damages Based on Comparative Fault.
3. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 INSURER’S DUTY TO INVESTIGATE Standard of Review Policy Language
4. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 THE APPLICATION PROCESS Agents Insurers
5. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 EXPERT TESTIMONY - Is expert testimony allowed in bad faith litigation?
7. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 POST LITIGATION CONDUCT - Is post-litigation conduct admissible in a bad faith action?
8. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 CLASS ACTIONS Elements: Numerosity Commonality Typicality Adequacy
9. Bad Faith Top 7 in 5 CLASS ACTIONS Kartman v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Case No. 09-1725, 7th Cir.; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 2830 (2/14/11). Oravsky v. Encompass Insurance Co., Civ. No. 10-3168 (JAP) (D. N.J.)(4/28/11)