The Iowa Supreme Court found that a separate action against the insurer for bad faith, filed after judgment was entered against the insurer on breach of contract, was barred by claim preclusion. Villarreal v. United Fire & Cas. Co., 2016 Iowa LEXIS 1 (Jan. 8, 2016). The insureds' restaurant was severely damaged by a fire on March 8, 2007. The insureds held a commercial property policy with United Fire with coverage limits of $386,400 for building replacement and $374,000 for personal property replacement. The insureds purchased the building and land a year and a half before the fire for $150,000, and the current property tax assessment was $153,000. At an examination under oath, the insureds testified that improvements of $83,500 had been made to the building after purchase. No documentation was presented for the majority of the improvements, however. In June, the insureds presented a lengthy inventory of personal property lost in the fire. The total claimed value of the inventory was $490,000. Also in June 2007, the insureds' attorney started writing letters to United Fire demanding immediate payment and threatening to sue. In August, one such letter threatened a suit for bad faith on the part of United Fire. By November, United Fire had paid $24,000 for the insureds' personal property losses and $108,310 for the building. The building payment went entirely to the mortgagee, so the insureds had received nothing for the loss of the building. The insureds filed a breach of contract suit against Untied Fire on March 7, 2008. Three years later, in March 2011, the jury returned a verdict for the insureds in the amount of $176,690 for the additional unpaid value of the building and $60,212 for the additional personal property. On June 20, 2011, three months after judgment was entered on the breach of contract action and more than four years after the fire, the insureds filed a new action in bad faith. The trial court granted United Fire's motion for summary judgment, finding that the bad faith action was barred by claim preclusion. Both the breach of contract and bad faith claims arose from the March 8, 2007 fire loss and United Fire's refusal to pay the claim. The court of appeals reversed. The Iowa Supreme Court noted that a great majority of jurisdictions held that a breach of contract verdict in favor of the insured and against the insurer precluded a subsequent action for first-party bad faith, at least where the bad faith claim was based on events that predated the filing of the breach of contract lawsuit. The court joined these other jurisdictions, determining that a final judgment in the breach of contract case would bar bringing a subsequent, separate bad faith lawsuit. The potential prejudice from introducing evidence relevant only to the insurer's bad faith could be resolved by bifurcating the trial into a breach of contract phase and a bad faith phase. A different result would be likely where the bad faith claim was based on conduct that occurred after the breach of contract case was filed. But here, the insureds had a basis for alleging bad faith in March 2008, when they filed their original suit, as well as ample time thereafter to amend that suit to add a bad faith claim.
Follow our page in Facebook "Insurance Online". from Insurance Law Hawaii
Once again, the Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee of the ABA will hold its annual seminar in Tucson, Arizona from March 3-5, 2016. The agenda is here. Each year, the conference offers informative, cutting-edge sessions on a variety of insurance-related topics. Participants from across the country include both policy holder and carrier lawyers, judges, risk managers, in-house counsel, and insurance professionals. The topic for my panel will be "Is There Any End to the Duty to Defend? Coverage, Claims and Bad Faith Issues." Anyone who is interested or works on coverage issues would find attending this seminar useful.
Follow our page in Facebook "Insurance Online". from Insurance Law Hawaii
The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the granting of summary judgment to the insurer that there was no coverage under the all risk policy for loss caused by wind and water. Porter v. Grand Casino of Miss., Inc., 2016 Miss. LEXIS 3 (Miss. Jan. 7, 2016). Cherri Porter's home was destroyed during Hurricane Katrina. The destruction occurred when the barge operated by Grand Casino of Mississippi came loose from its moorings and collided with her home. Ms. Porter submitted a claim to her insurer, State Farm. The policy excluded loss caused by wind or water damage. Also excluded was "loss that would not have occurred in the absence of an excluded event." Because any loss caused by the barge would not have occurred in the absence of an excluded event - i.e., the flood of storm surge that broke the barge from its moorings - State Farm denied coverage. Porter sued State Farm for bad faith denial of her claim. In discovery, she admitted there was no other explanation for the barge's movement other than the forces of wind and water. Because the policy excluded loss caused by water, the trial court granted summary judgment to State Farm. The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed. State Farm excluded both loss caused by wind damage and loss caused by water damage. The policy unambiguously stated that any loss that would not have occurred absent water damage was not covered. The barge, by itself, would not have collided with Porter's home. The barge did not act independently to cause loss, but instead operated in conjunction with the storm surge to cause the damage.
Follow our page in Facebook "Insurance Online". from Insurance Law Hawaii
In responding to a certified question, the New Hampshire Supreme Court held that the excess carrier's duty to defend is not triggered until the primary's insurer's policy is exhausted. Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Stratford Ins Co., 2016 N.H. LEXIS 8 (N.H. Jan. 26, 2016). Old Republic and Stratford each provided coverage for a a tractor-trailer that collided with a vehicle. The owner of the tractor, Ryder Truck Rentals, was insured by Old Republic. DAM Express leased the tractor from Ryder. Pursuant to the lease, Ryder was responsible for obtaining a policy from the tractor. DAM, however, also purchased a separate policy from Stratford. When the collision occurred, the driver of the tractor-trailer was employed by DAM. The passengers of the vehicle were injured and sued the driver, DAM and Ryder. Old Republic defended all defendants, but asked Stratford to help pay the defense costs. Stratford refused, contending its coverage for DAM and the driver was excess to Old Republic's policy. Old Republic sued Stratford, seeking a declaratory judgment that Stratford had an obligation, as a co-primary insurer, to provide coverage and pay a portion of the defense costs. The federal district court ruled that Old Republic provided primary coverage and Stratford provided excess coverage. Under New Hampshire law, however, the duty of an insurer to defense was the same whether its potential liability was as a primary or as an excess carrier. Therefore, even though it considered itself an excess carrier, Stratford was obligated to share equally in the defense costs in the underlying action. Both parties appealed. The First Circuit certified the question to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, asking when an excess carrier's duty to defend was triggered. The New Hampshire court adopted the majority rule: where an insured was covered by both a primary policy and an excess policy, the excess carrier was not obligated to participate in the defense until the primary policy limits were exhausted. The court's prior statement on the excess carrier's duty to defend was dicta and did not control the issue now before the court.
Follow our page in Facebook "Insurance Online". from Insurance Law Hawaii
According to overnight Nielsen ratings data, Sunday night’s almost record-breaking Super Bowl 50 was the second highest rated Super Bowl in football history. Forty-nine percent of households with a television tuned in to watch the national event.
Even those who aren’t loyal to either participating team or fans of football watch solely for the much-talked about ads. Commercials are a large part of the quintessential Super Bowl viewing experience and tend to be talked about long after the national event.
A 30-second advertisement during this year’s Super Bowl cost an extravagant $5 million, which checks in at $166,666 per second of air time. And that $5 million doesn’t include production costs or celebrity endorsements, meaning the finalized product costs companies a pretty penny, to say the least.
The USA Today Ad Meter, a live poll administered to several focus groups during the annual telecast of the Super Bowl, tracked reactions to the commercials on a zero-to-10 scale, with 10 being the most popular and zero being the least.
If you were too distracted by consuming copious amounts of chips and guacamole during the commercial breaks and missed a few of the ads, HomeInsurance.com has you covered. We took a look at the highest rated car commercials according to the Ad Meter — because new cars and auto insurance go hand-in-hand, right?
1. Hyundai
Hyundai stole the airwaves, dominating the first quarter, second quarter and halftime with a total of four 30-second ads, three of which came in close to the top according to the Ad Meter. With so much air time, it’s no surprise that the manufacturer ranked at the coveted No. 1 spot when compared to the ad metrics of competitors in their market space. The ad for the Hyundai Genesis highlighted the tech-savvy practicality of the car’s vehicle-tracking capabilities.
“First Date,” receiving a 6.9 metrics score, featured comedian Kevin Hart as an overly protective father taking full advantage of this feature by lending his daughter’s date the vehicle and keeping tabs on their whereabouts throughout the evening.
Hyundai’s second-highest ranking ad, “Ryanville,” earned a score of 6.27 and primarily focused on the safety features of its Genesis sedan, including auto-braking capabilities that engage if you get distracted behind the wheel, helping keep you and your passengers safe.
“The Chase,” Hyundai’s third-highest ranking ad, scored a 6.19 with an ad featuring an adventurous high-speed chase between a couple and two bears, crediting the vehicle’s voice-activated self-starting capabilities.
2. Honda
A 6.13 Ad Meter score for Honda’s “A New Truck to Love” ad caused the automobile manufacturer to come in at second place with its 30-second commercial. Humor is often effective in ads, and this one was no exception. Featuring a herd of sheep singing Queen’s “Somebody to Love,” Honda took a lighthearted approach to advertising its new Ridgeline truck equipped with truck bed audio – the only truck on the market with this capability.
3. Audi
Adventure. Freedom. Reliving youthful glory days. Audi’s “Commander,” with a rating of 6.04, comes in third with its stunningly ethereal 30-second ad. The commercial appealed to adrenaline junkies by comparing the adventure of space exploration to driving the new R8, which has a promised top speed of 205 miles per hour. It also tugged at viewers’ heartstrings with its inclusion of audio from the late David Bowie.
4. Toyota
Toyota produced two ads – “The Longest Chase” and “Heck on Wheels” – which took lighthearted approaches to advertising its Prius. “The Longest Chase” earned an Ad Meter score of 5.97, while the score for “Heck on Wheels” was unavailable. The manufacturer humorously poked fun at the car’s less-than-exciting image by portraying bank robbers escaping the clutches of police officers during a days-long chase, and a morning commute that’s actually enjoyable, respectively. The commercials’ goals were to prove that the vehicle can be both an incredible, powerful car and easy on the environment.
5. Jeep
Perhaps one of the most poignant and emotional ads of the top five, Jeep effectively pulled at its viewers’ heartstrings through a black and white ad aptly named “Portraits,” which earned a ranking of 5.70. The ad’s beautiful storytelling spoke about how Jeep’s drivers are the true creators of the vehicle and that a lifetime of meaningful moments and memories produced while driving a Jeep were what truly made the automobile great. <span></span> “4x4ever,” Jeep’s 60-second ad, scored a 5.21 and aired during the final quarter of the game. Using unique, catchy music and stunning imagery, the ad effectively appealed to the millennial generation with the unspoken promise that owning a Jeep could provide a lifetime of adventure and memories.
HomeInsurance.com Editor Picks
Since not all auto manufacturers’ ads made the cut for the top five based on Ad Meter results, a few of our HomeInsurance.com editors gathered and picked those that we felt deserved a shout.
“The Big Game Meets the Big Day”
Ensuing quite a few laughs from our editorial team and arguably being the most fitting commercial of the big game, Buick’s ad for their new Cascada convertible featured NFL star Odell Beckham Jr. and Emily Ratajkowski. The setting for this ad was a wedding, where a bridesmaid “totally Odell’d” the catch of the bouquet, much to the surprise of the wedding guests. But the biggest surprise (aside from Beckham Jr. being in attendance at the wedding)? The fact that the bride and groom’s stunning getaway car was, in fact, a Buick.
“The Walken Closet”
At HomeInsurance.com, we love a good pun. Kia’s commercial to advertise its newest midsize sedan features Christopher Walken sitting in a couple’s walk-in closet. Walken criticizes the husband in the ad for blending in and walking through life like “beige socks.” Walken encourages him to purchase the new Kia Optima, which he refers to as being like the “world’s most exciting pair of socks.” According to the company’s website, the Optima is “Not Your Average Midsize Sedan,” and stands out with its sleek, sophisticated design and enviable safety features.
“Defy Labels”
Mini Cooper’s “Defy Labels” ad challenged the status quo and the labels that are commonly put on drivers of the vehicle. The ad featured a multitude of celebrities and called out specific stereotypes, making the statement that the Mini Cooper’s new Mini Clubman is an outstanding vehicle for anyone and everyone, regardless of demographic or lifestyle.
“Simply Put”
Though not a car commercial, our editors agreed that “Simply Put” was arguably the best ad of the Super Bowl.
Budweiser’s phenomenal ad in the form of a public service announcement featured Helen Mirren and used a touch of humor while effectively sending a clear, important message regarding the dangers of driving under the influence. Since Mirren is “notoriously frank and insensitive,” she states that anyone who drives drunk is a “short-sighted, utterly useless, oxygen-wasting, human form of pollution.” This advertisement promoted the beer company’s #GiveADamn campaign, which donates one dollar to safe ride programs, such as Uber and Lyft, with every tweeted hashtag.
At HomeInsurance.com, we were incredibly grateful for this announcement and love the fact that such a well-done PSA has garnered so much attention.
Buying a new car? Make sure you’re covered!
If the ads from Super Bowl 50 have you considering purchasing a new vehicle, keep your excitement at bay while searching for an auto insurance policy to protect it. Make sure you find a policy that has enough liability coverage and additional protections to grant you peace of mind on the road.
Follow our page in Facebook "Insurance Online". from Home Insurance Blog
