We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics. If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
USA - October 16 2012
Retreating from its bold pronouncement that under California law "an insurer has a duty to effectuate settlement where liability is reasonably clear, even in the absence of a settlement demand", the Ninth Circuit recently amended Du v. Allstate, 681 F. 3d 1118, 1123 (9th Cir. 2012) (Du #1) and narrowed the holding of the opinion solely to the issue of whether there was an evidentiary foundation for the jury instruction appellant Du sought regarding bad faith and an insurer's settlement obligations.
USA - July 11 2012
Although California courts have yet to directly address this issue, the Ninth Circuit, in a recently decided case construing California law, held “an insurer has a duty to effectuate settlement where liability is reasonably clear, even in the absence of a settlement demand."
