Author: Keith Liguori

Jun 2nd, 2021

Washington Supreme Court Confirms Broad Expansion of Premises Liability Notice Exception for Businesses

On May 13, 2021, the Washington State Supreme Court released its decision in Johnson v. Liquor & Cannabis Bd., 98726-2, 2021 WL 1916522 (Wash. May 13, 2021), laying down another marker in a nearly four-decade expansion of Washington’s premises liability standard as applied to business owners. It is a fundamental…

Jul 21st, 2020

REMINDER: Effective August 1, 2020, WAC 284-30-770: Adverse Notification Requirement

Effective August 1, 2020, Washington will require all insurers to add the following notice with any “adverse notification” issued to an insured: “If you have questions or concerns about the actions of your insurance company or agent, or would like information on your rights to file an appeal, contact the…

Jun 10th, 2020

Washington’s Highest Court Speaks on Vital Conflict of Interest Issue in Plein v. USAA

On May 21, 2020, the Washington State Supreme Court released its decision in Plein v. USAA Casualty Insurance, __Wn.2d __, No. 97563-9, 2020 WL 2568541 (May 21, 2020). In a landmark decision in Washington legal ethics, the Court established a new standard for what constitutes a “substantially related matter,” under…

Dec 10th, 2018

Early Exit from Defense, Even After Coverage is Exhausted, Can Be Bad Faith in Washington State

An excess exposure case involving multiple claimants is a classic fact pattern for a potential bad faith claim.  One such scenario was discussed in the August 2018 Washington Court of Appeals’ decision in Singh v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., 428 P.3d 1237 (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). In Singh, the Court…

Mar 2nd, 2018

BREAKING NEWS: House Bill 1128 Expanding MAR Passes through Washington Legislature.

On February 28, 2018, Engrossed House Bill 1128 (“EHB 1128”), was passed by the Washington Senate.[i]   Having previously passed through the House, the bill will now reach the desk of Governor Jay Inslee.  EHB 1128 significantly expands the jurisdiction of Washington’s mandatory civil arbitration (“MAR,” governed by RCW 7.06 et seq.).  Previously,…

Dec 12th, 2017

Oregon Court of Appeals’s Opinion Affirms Dismissal Based on Contractual Liability Waiver in Commercial Contract

On October 25, 2017, the Court of Appeals released its decision in Am. Wholesale Prods. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 288 Or App 418 (2017).  The Court’s opinion opens the door for practitioners to bring liability waiver defenses in future commercial litigation, despite the Oregon Supreme Court’s hard line against such…

Nov 17th, 2017

Confidentiality of Mediation-Related Communications in Washington

Confidentiality can be one of the most valuable tools in mediation.  The parties’ candor to the impartial mediator allows for an informed valuation and possible settlement.  Candid dialogue is encouraged by protecting mediation communications from discovery by the other parties to the litigation.  Thus in Washington, like Oregon, mediation communications…

Nov 17th, 2017

Alfieri v. Solomon and Confidentiality of Mediation-Related Communications in Oregon

On December 10, 2015, in Alfieri v Solomon, 358 Or. 383, 365 P3d 99 (2015), the Oregon Supreme Court addressed, for the first time, the extent to which the confidentiality provisions of Oregon’s mediation statutes, ORS 36.100 to 36.238, prevent a client from offering evidence of communications made by his…

Oct 16th, 2017

Washington Supreme Court Says No Per Se Rule Prohibits Attorneys from Representing Insurers and Their Insureds in Unrelated Actions

In Arden v. Forsberg & Umlauf, P.S., __ Wn.2d __, __P.3d __ (2017), the Washington Supreme Court rejected an insured’s attempt to collect damages for breach of fiduciary duty and legal malpractice from his former insurance defense counsel.  The insured sought to impose a per se rule of disqualification for…

Sep 1st, 2017

Oregon Court of Appeals Discusses “Actual Knowledge” Requirement of ORS 12.117

On July 19, 2017, the Oregon Court of Appeals released its opinion in Doe v. Silverman et al, 286 Or App. 813, ___ P3d ___ (2017), an action for damages based on child sexual abuse.  The opinion addresses Oregon Revised Statute (“ORS”) 12.117 – which is Oregon’s extended statute of…

Jul 27th, 2017

The Forgotten Duties of Bad Faith Beyond IFCA – Washington Bad Faith Claims Under Common Law and the CPA

In previous posts, we have detailed the Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA)—advising insurers on how to act within IFCA’s directives,[i] while easing concerns about IFCA’s enhanced damages provisions.[ii]  At the same time, we cautioned readers to be aware that the promulgation of IFCA did not do away with first-party insureds’…

Jun 17th, 2017

The Meaning of “Improvement to Real Property” in Washington’s Statute of Repose

Washington’s construction statute of repose, RCW 4.16.300 and .310, applies to “all claims or causes of action of any kind against any person, arising from such person having constructed, altered or repaired any improvement upon real property. . .”  RCW 4.16.310.  The statute prohibits any cause of action “not accrued…

Jun 7th, 2017

SCOTUS Opens the Door to Suits Against Tribal Employees

On April 25, 2017, in Lewis v. Clarke, 581 U.S. ___, 137 S. Ct. 1285, 197 L. Ed. 2d 631 (2017), the United States Supreme Court held that a tribal employee was not entitled to invoke tribal sovereign immunity as a defense to state tort claims. Lewis v. Clarke arose…

May 17th, 2017

Ninth Circuit Says Oregon Employee Complaints Need Not Leave the Office to Obtain Protection

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent opinion, Brunozzi v. Cable Communications Inc., 851 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2017), demonstrates an ongoing trend for courts to provide broad protection for work-related complaints under Oregon law.[1] The Ninth Circuit’s broad interpretation of an Oregon whistleblowing statute serves as a warning to…

May 3rd, 2017

Oregon PIP Benefits Do Not Include Transportation Costs (Other Than Ambulance)

In Dowell v. Oregon Mutual Ins. Co., 361 Or 62, 388 P3d 1050 (2017), a PIP insurer declined to pay transportation costs that its insured incurred when attending medical appointments related to treatment for her injuries that resulted from a motor vehicle accident.  In response, the insured filed a claim…

Apr 12th, 2017

Best Practices in PIP Reimbursement — Oregon

Unlike in Washington, a Personal Injury Protection (PIP) insurer in Oregon has authority for recovery above and beyond a standard subrogation claim.  Oregon PIP recovery is governed by three separate statutory provisions, each giving the PIP insurer a different avenue of recovery.  However, the Oregon courts have held that a…

Apr 12th, 2017

Best Practices in PIP Reimbursement and Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Subrogation Claims — Washington

What is Subrogation? Subrogation reflects apportionment of fault for an automobile accident, allowing an insurer of a fault-free party to recover from the insurer of the at-fault party, while also promoting full compensation of the injured claimant.  The logistics can be complex: Initially, the claimant’s own insurer pays Personal Injury…

Mar 23rd, 2017

Oregon Court of Appeals Awards Attorney Fees in Additional Insured Coverage Action

We continue to follow the West Hills Dev. Co. v. Chartis Claims, Inc. case.  In February, Chris Parker told you about the Oregon Supreme Court’s holding earlier this year reaffirming insurers’ broad duty to defend an alleged additional insured based on vague allegations in the complaint.[1]  The Supreme Court affirmed…

Feb 15th, 2017

Unreasonable Denial of Coverage or Benefits Required for IFCA Acceptance

All agree that Washington’s Insurance Fair Conduct Act (“IFCA”) mandates that a court to grant attorney fees and allows the court to award triple damages if an insurer acts unreasonably in denying a claim for coverage or payment of benefits.[i]  However, prior to the Washington Supreme Court’s recent decision in…