Claude
ChatGPT
PerplexityComunale v. Traders & General Ins. Co.
The foundational implied-covenant duty to accept reasonable settlement demands within policy limits.
Practice Area Spotlight
Insurance
Insurance lawyers use Midpage to research coverage disputes, duty-to-defend questions, bad-faith claims, and ERISA benefits litigation. The statutes, regulations, and case law behind that work are collected below.
How Insurance Lawyers Use Midpage
Browse to see how Midpage works through coverage and bad-faith questions from real lawyers.
Time-Limited Settlement DemandsFind decisions on when an insurer’s failure to accept a time-limited policy-limits settlement demand supports a bad-faith failure-to-settle claim, and summarize the state statutory safe harbors.Appraisal & Bad Faith After Ace AmericanHow have Texas courts treated bad-faith allegations raised to defeat appraisal after In re Ace American, and how does that compare to other appraisal-heavy states?Construction Defect as "Occurrence"Compare how state high courts treat defective workmanship as an "occurrence" under CGL policies, including the subcontractor exception line.Excess Insurer Equitable SubrogationAfter the Nevada Supreme Court’s recent answer, collect the state positions on excess insurers’ equitable-subrogation claims against primary insurers for failure to settle within combined limits.ERISA Standard of Review After GlennDraft a brief section on abuse-of-discretion review after Metropolitan Life v. Glenn where the administrator both decides and pays claims.Duty to Defend: Eight Corners vs. Extrinsic EvidenceCompare the states that confine the duty-to-defend analysis to the pleadings with those permitting extrinsic evidence, citing each state’s leading case.
Core Insurance Collections
The statutes, regulations, and courts behind coverage and bad-faith practice.
Statutes
The state bad-faith, prompt-payment, and direct-action anchors, searchable across all 50 state codes — plus the federal overlay that frames coverage litigation: ERISA, the FAA, and McCarran-Ferguson.
| ERISA § 502 — Civil enforcement Benefit-denial actions and § 502(a)(3) equitable relief — the remedies mapped in Amara and Montanile | 29 U.S.C. § 1132 |
| ERISA § 514 — Preemption Relate-to preemption, the insurance savings clause, and the deemer clause | 29 U.S.C. § 1144 |
Regulations
The ERISA claims-procedure rules, state claims-handling regulations in the state administrative codes, and every DOL and Treasury/FIO rulemaking as published in the Federal Register.
| ERISA claims-procedure regulation Full and fair review, appeal deadlines, and the disability-claim independence requirements | 29 CFR § 2560.503-1 |
Agency Decisions & Guidance
The administrative materials that shape claims practice — DOL’s ERISA notices are searchable now; state insurance department materials are on the way.
| Federal Register Notices DOL and HHS notices on claims procedures, appeals, and external review under ERISA and the ACA | Notices |
Courts & Tribunals
The forums where insurance disputes are litigated — most of them in the state courts, with a federal overlay in diversity and ERISA.
| Appellate State supreme and intermediate appellate courts, plus the U.S. Supreme Court and all 13 federal circuits for the ERISA and federal overlay |
| Trial State trial courts; U.S. District Courts — diversity coverage actions and ERISA benefits suits under § 502 |
| Arbitration Reinsurance and coverage arbitrations reach the courts through FAA confirmation and vacatur proceedings |
Key Cases
The controlling authorities — linked to full text, treatment, and citing decisions in Midpage.
Gruenberg v. Aetna Ins. Co.
First-party bad faith sounds in tort — the duty not to withhold payments unreasonably reaches beyond contract damages.
San Diego Navy Fed. Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Society
Reservation-of-rights conflicts entitle the insured to independent counsel — the origin of Cumis counsel.
Humana Inc. v. Forsyth
Federal RICO claims proceed where they do not impair state insurance regulation.
UNUM Life Ins. Co. v. Ward
State notice-prejudice rules are saved from ERISA preemption as laws regulating insurance.
State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Campbell
Due process limits punitive awards in bad-faith cases — few awards exceeding single-digit ratios will satisfy it.
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn
A dual-role administrator’s conflict of interest is weighed as a factor within abuse-of-discretion review.
Montanile v. Board of Trustees
No equitable lien against a beneficiary’s dissipated general assets — plan reimbursement claims must trace specific funds.
Great Lakes Ins. SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Co.
Choice-of-law clauses in marine insurance policies are presumptively enforceable under federal maritime law.
Truck Ins. Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co.
Insurers with financial responsibility for claims are parties in interest entitled to be heard in Chapter 11.
In re Ace American Ins. Co.
Bad-faith allegations do not create an exception to the enforceability of an appraisal clause.
Eastern Steel Constructors v. Int’l Fidelity Ins. Co.
Pennsylvania’s bad-faith statute applies only to insurance policies — not to surety bonds.