For many years, aggressive plaintiffs have attempted to manufacture and manipulate claims with the sole focus on creating extra-contractual liability. In response to those tactics, insurers responded with claims of “reverse bad faith.” While some courts around the country were receptive to what seemed like a novel theory, “reverse bad faith” did not gain national acceptance. However, many of the underlying concepts and defenses to insurers are well-established in the law and remain in effect.
The purpose of this seminar will highlight for attendees the evolution of “reverse bad faith” and how that may continue to be a valuable tool for insurers and their counsel.
Principles
- Understand the Foundations of Bad Faith Claims
- Effective evaluation of bad faith litigation begins with understanding the legal elements of a bad faith claim, the insurer’s duties, and the factual circumstances that commonly give rise to extra-contractual liability.
- Recognize the Evolution of Reverse Bad Faith
- Although “reverse bad faith” has not achieved broad judicial acceptance as an independent cause of action, its underlying principles have influenced the development of recognized defenses available to insurers.
- Distinguish Viable Defenses from Rejected Theories
- Courts have accepted some litigation strategies aimed at addressing manufactured or inflated bad faith claims while rejecting others. Practitioners should understand which arguments have gained judicial acceptance and why.
- Develop Strategic Responses to Manufactured Bad Faith Claims
- Insurers and their counsel should identify tactics used to create or amplify bad faith exposure and apply established legal defenses and sound claims-handling practices to effectively respond while remaining compliant with applicable law.
Syllabus
- Fundamentals of a bad faith claim and factors driving the litigation
- History of Reverse Bad Faith, what brought us to this point
- In depth analysis of various grounds for challenging an Plaintiff’s efforts to create a bad faith claim – what courts have accepted and what courts have rejected
