-
June 19, 2026
TACOMA, Wash. — The Division II Washington Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s denial of an auto insurer’s motion for summary judgment on breach of contract and extracontractual claims after determining that questions of fact exist as to whether the insured’s recovery for damages following an auto accident is limited by a waiver and whether the insurer’s payment of underinsured (UIM) benefits bars the insured’s extracontractual claims brought under the state’s Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA).
-
June 19, 2026
DENVER — A contractor’s insurer in an appellee brief urges the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to affirm a lower court’s grant of summary judgment in its favor in a townhome management company’s suit against the insurer alleging bad faith, arguing that the Nunn agreement between the company and the contractor to settle an underlying action was the result of collusion and does not require a jury trial to determine its enforceability.
-
June 19, 2026
SANTA ANA, Calif. — Granting summary judgment for an insurer on all claims in a putative class case involving disability benefits under a group occupational accident coverage (OAC) policy offered to independent contractors, a California federal judge ruled that the insurer is entitled to $75,446.71 in equitable restitution for short-term disability (STD) benefits it paid because the claimant also received a $40,000 settlement that falls under the policy’s nonduplication of workers’ compensation provision.
-
June 19, 2026
TACOMA, Wash. — Arguing in part that she was wrongly denied disability income benefits for a nearly six-month period that corresponded closely with the start of her pregnancy, an anesthesiologist sued her insurer in a Washington federal court for alleged violations of the Washington Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA), breach of contract and bad faith.
-
June 17, 2026
PITTSBURGH — A district court properly dismissed insureds’ breach of contract and bad faith claims in a dispute over coverage for damaged siding on a rental property because the policy clearly allows the insurer to replace only the damaged portion of the siding with a “like kind” siding, the insurer tells the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in its June 17 appellee brief.
-
June 17, 2026
SAN JOSE, Calif. — Focusing on a claim for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing and saying in part that “a finder of fact could draw contradictory inferences regarding the reasonableness of” the investigation, a California federal judge denied cross-motions for summary judgment in a suit over termination of long-term disability (LTD) benefits for a claimant whose diagnoses include postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome and fibromyalgia.
-
June 16, 2026
DOVER, Del.—The Delaware Supreme Court refused an insurer’s application for certification of interlocutory appeal of a lower court’s grant of partial summary judgment in favor of a technology company insured seeking coverage for an underlying securities class action and a Securities Exchange Commission lawsuit arising from a merger between a privately held company and a special purpose acquisition company, declining to disturb the lower court’s interpretation of the policy’s “public offering” exclusion.
-
June 16, 2026
LOS ANGELES — An insured maintains in its reply in support of its motion to stay its silica coverage suit pending in California federal court that a stay is warranted until the underlying silica bodily injury suits are resolved but says the stay should be limited to the indemnification and bad faith claims.
-
June 16, 2026
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — A Fourth District Florida Court of Appeal panel reversed a trial court’s dismissal of an insured’s bad faith suit stemming from a dispute over coverage for the collapse of a ceiling in the insured’s restaurant after determining that the action can proceed because the trial court misapplied the precedent on which it relied to dismiss the suit.
-
June 15, 2026
DALLAS — An insured’s claims for breach of contract and violation of the Texas Prompt Payment Claims Act can proceed because questions of fact exist over whether all of the damage incurred to an insured home was caused by a wind and hail storm, a Texas federal magistrate judge held in partially denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.
-
June 15, 2026
FLORENCE, S.C. — A breach of contract claim alleged against a life insurer must be dismissed based on the insurer’s payment of an accidental death benefit, made after the beneficiary filed suit; however, the bad faith claim is not subject to dismissal because the claim is not mooted by the insurer’s payment, a South Carolina federal judge said in partially granting the insurer’s supplemental motion to dismiss.
-
June 15, 2026
DENVER — A Colorado federal judge partially granted a homeowners insurer’s motion for summary judgment in a dispute over coverage for a fire at a home owned by the insureds after determining that no coverage is owed for the damage to the building because the insureds did not live in the home as required by the policy.
-
June 15, 2026
SCRANTON, Pa. — A breach of contract claim against a homeowners insurer that denied an insured’s water damage claim can proceed because questions of fact exist regarding the timing of the loss and whether the loss was sudden or gradual, a Pennsylvania federal judge said in partially denying the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.
-
June 15, 2026
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — An insured’s bad faith claim against an auto insurer cannot proceed because the evidence shows that the insurer took immediate steps to attempt to resolve a claim against the insured before an excess judgment was entered against the insured, a Florida federal magistrate judge said in granting the insurer’s motion for summary judgment.
-
June 15, 2026
CINCINNATI — Two insurers are seeking rehearing en banc after a split panel of the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that they owed a property owner coverage for a fire that burned down a building during renovations because the property owner could not have complied with the policy’s requirement that a fence be built around the entirety of the property during renovations, arguing that the majority’s finding that an insurer must prove it was prejudiced by its insured’s noncompliance with a preloss condition of coverage conflicts with circuit precedent.
-
June 12, 2026
NASHVILLE, Tenn. — A Virginia industrial services company sued its captive insurer in Tennessee federal court for breach of contract, alleging that the insurer wrongfully denied coverage under an actual net loss insurance policy after a fatal accident at a key customer’s steel facility caused a shutdown, restricted access to the company’s equipment and office trailer and led to the termination of a customer agreement worth 24% of the company’s annual revenue.
-
June 12, 2026
PORTLAND, Ore. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reversed and remanded a district court’s summary judgment ruling entered in favor of a life insurer after determining that the policy’s terms regarding the amount of premiums owed are ambiguous and must be interpreted in favor of the insureds.
-
June 11, 2026
ATLANTA — The 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 10 affirmed a district court’s ruling that an auto insurer did not act in bad faith in failing to settle a claim against its insureds because there is no evidence that the insurer failed to conduct an investigation or failed to advise its insureds of settlement negotiations and communications with the claimant.
-
June 10, 2026
DENVER — A trial court did not err in granting an auto insurer’s motion to compel an insured to produce medical records and to undergo an independent medical exam because the Colorado precedent cited by the insured applies only to bad faith claims and, therefore, does not preclude the insurer from seeking evidence that was not available to it at the time it made its claim decision, the Colorado Supreme Court said.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 8 affirmed a lower federal court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of an insurer in an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit seeking coverage under a Standard Flood Insurance Policy (SFIP) for flood damage caused by Hurricane Delta and a separate flood event, agreeing with the lower court that the insured’s claims are time-barred.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — The Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a federal court’s dismissal of an insured’s breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit seeking full crime coverage for its losses arising from $1,251,068.34 it paid to a fraudulent account, agreeing with the lower court that coverage is limited to the policy’s $100,000 Deception Fraud Provision.
-
June 09, 2026
NEW ORLEANS — An insurer told a Louisiana federal court that it is appealing a jury’s finding that it acted in bad faith in its handling of a church insured’s claim arising from Hurricane Ida property damage, the $4,567,441.68 final judgment entered against it and the court’s denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law or for a new trial.
-
June 03, 2026
SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge granted summary judgment for Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Co. in a breach of contract and bad faith suit filed by an insured after Allstate denied his claim for the purported theft of his truck, finding that the insured made a material misrepresentation to Allstate in claiming that the keys he provided to the insurer belonged to the missing truck when in fact they belonged to another person’s stolen vehicle.
-
June 03, 2026
DECATUR, Ga. — Emory University sued its insurer for breach of contract, bad faith and breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing in a Georgia court, alleging that an underlying lawsuit seeking money back after classes and services were impacted by the coronavirus pandemic alleges “precisely the types of claims” that the policy’s Educators Legal Liability (ELL) section expressly covers.
-
June 02, 2026
FORT WORTH, Texas — A Texas federal judge held that the testimony of two experts in a dispute over insurance coverage for alleged storm damage to two commercial buildings was inadmissible and that the insurer is entitled to summary judgment on breach of contract and state insurance law claims because the insured failed to provide evidence from which a jury could segregate covered and uncovered damages.