img_gavelMoney_540x360

Insurer Can’t Unilaterally Limit Rates Payable to Defense Counsel

The Western District of Washington recently ruled that, absent a contrary term in the insurance policy, an insurer does not have the sole power to set the rates it will pay for defending its insured in a lawsuit.  The case, National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Coinstar, Inc., et al., arose after the insured, Redbox, was named as … Continue reading »

Insurer May Not Sue the Insured’s Attorney for Malpractice

A common issue in insurance coverage matters is the nature of the relationship between the attorney hired to represent the insured and the insurer who pays for the attorneys’ services.  A recent case decided by the Supreme Court of Washington held that an insurer who hires an attorney for their insured cannot later sue that attorney for malpractice. In Stewart … Continue reading »

Insurance Coverage: Stigma Damages vs. Diminished Value Damages

A recent Washington appellate case clarified the distinction between “stigma damages” and “diminished value damages” to a vehicle involved in a collision and addressed whether their recovery may be excluded from an automobile insurance policy.  In Ibrahim v. AIU Ins. Co., 177 Wn.App. 504, 312 P.3d 998 (2013), an insured’s vehicle was damaged by an at-fault driver, and the insured … Continue reading »