well, how is it lowball, when in good faith they were solvent for $1 mil…that to me is not bad faith…what is a shame is why did the bar not have a higher limit of liability? $1 mil is not enough…i think it’s the owner of the bar that might be the problem…because, u see where the insurance did pay the $1 mil…bad faith? NO — Bad judgement of the bartender who kept serving — YES. Bad Judgement on the DRIVER — YES! why do we always try to push the issue that it is always someone else’s fault and not our own… the bartender did not force the drinker the drink…did not force him to drive his car…why is society so entrenched in getting after the other person/company – instead of taking the blame…is that because the person does not have money? then why are we not suing for the company whom sold the person the bullet or sold the rifle to the person whom murdered someone? we don’t — again, it’s a matter of principal — taking responsiblity for the actions you do!!!
woodchuck, you miss the point. the issue in the bad faith case was the insurance company’s conduct. In the underlying case, the insurance co put their own interests over and above its insured and lost in a big way in that gamble. They gambled with their insureds money and future instead of doing the right thing and making a policy limit offer before or even after huge verdict.
They lowballed and got stung. Maybe next time, after this 20 million dollar education, they will do right by their insured.
The unfortunate innocent injured worker–who does have my sympathy–was initially awarded $75 million and then argued that the case should have been settled with him for less than $1 million?
The story is about an insurance carrier’s failure to settle the claim for within the policy limits. What makes this notable is during the course of litigation the plaintiff’s esq demanded the policy limits to settle the dram shop claim and the good people at Princeton decided to roll the dice and came up on the short end of a 75 Million verdict. Compounding their mistake they refused to offer their 1 million policy to settle post verdict. This left the bar owner and others exposed to a judgment that could have been settled and resolved if they just did what they were supposed to do.
This is what we call bad faith claims practices – when an insurance carrier puts its own financial interests ahead of its insured. Does anybody think the injuries aren’t worth at least a million?
They are saying that the insurer should have steeled for policy limits because the claimant had a strong case and it was obvious that the case would result in a judgement for more than the limits. Once bad faith is proven the limits no longer apply and teh insurer is on the hook for the total awarded.
Clearly there is more to this story than the summary, I’d have to believe that the insurance company tried to Low-Ball or that they thought there were other carriers responsible. However, on the surface, unless they felt that the PH hadn’t had any drinks at the tavern, the $1Mil pay out should have been an automatic payout from what I can tell.
the facts of the case are available on westlaw, 2004 W.L.4962363. any reasonable adjuster/carrier would have settled for the policy limits quickly. Only Princeton knows why they didn’t. the sad part is the 20 million isnt enough to pay the injured party’s meds/expenses for the rest of his life.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
ANYONE SEE THE HISTORY THE COURTS TRYING TO STOP THE INS BOYS FROM ALL THE BS. ITS WAKE UP TIME. YOU CAN HAVE FAITH IN THAT.
Clearly there is more to this story than the summary, I’d have to believe that the insurance company tried to Low-Ball
well, how is it lowball, when in good faith they were solvent for $1 mil…that to me is not bad faith…what is a shame is why did the bar not have a higher limit of liability? $1 mil is not enough…i think it’s the owner of the bar that might be the problem…because, u see where the insurance did pay the $1 mil…bad faith? NO — Bad judgement of the bartender who kept serving — YES. Bad Judgement on the DRIVER — YES! why do we always try to push the issue that it is always someone else’s fault and not our own… the bartender did not force the drinker the drink…did not force him to drive his car…why is society so entrenched in getting after the other person/company – instead of taking the blame…is that because the person does not have money? then why are we not suing for the company whom sold the person the bullet or sold the rifle to the person whom murdered someone? we don’t — again, it’s a matter of principal — taking responsiblity for the actions you do!!!
woodchuck, you miss the point. the issue in the bad faith case was the insurance company’s conduct. In the underlying case, the insurance co put their own interests over and above its insured and lost in a big way in that gamble. They gambled with their insureds money and future instead of doing the right thing and making a policy limit offer before or even after huge verdict.
They lowballed and got stung. Maybe next time, after this 20 million dollar education, they will do right by their insured.
Thank God that some states have bad faith laws to protect policy holders from this sort of abuse. Too bad it wasn’t more.
The unfortunate innocent injured worker–who does have my sympathy–was initially awarded $75 million and then argued that the case should have been settled with him for less than $1 million?
The story is about an insurance carrier’s failure to settle the claim for within the policy limits. What makes this notable is during the course of litigation the plaintiff’s esq demanded the policy limits to settle the dram shop claim and the good people at Princeton decided to roll the dice and came up on the short end of a 75 Million verdict. Compounding their mistake they refused to offer their 1 million policy to settle post verdict. This left the bar owner and others exposed to a judgment that could have been settled and resolved if they just did what they were supposed to do.
This is what we call bad faith claims practices – when an insurance carrier puts its own financial interests ahead of its insured. Does anybody think the injuries aren’t worth at least a million?
They are saying that the insurer should have steeled for policy limits because the claimant had a strong case and it was obvious that the case would result in a judgement for more than the limits. Once bad faith is proven the limits no longer apply and teh insurer is on the hook for the total awarded.
Clearly there is more to this story than the summary, I’d have to believe that the insurance company tried to Low-Ball or that they thought there were other carriers responsible. However, on the surface, unless they felt that the PH hadn’t had any drinks at the tavern, the $1Mil pay out should have been an automatic payout from what I can tell.
the facts of the case are available on westlaw, 2004 W.L.4962363. any reasonable adjuster/carrier would have settled for the policy limits quickly. Only Princeton knows why they didn’t. the sad part is the 20 million isnt enough to pay the injured party’s meds/expenses for the rest of his life.