Timing of Arbitration is the Result Here.
Janopaul+Blocks Cos., LLC v. Superior Court, Case No. D059282 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 17, 2011) (certified for publication) is an interesting Cumis situation where an insurer did not agree to defend until 2 years after tender and, before there was a ruling on a Civil Code section 2860 arbitration request by the insurer to gauge reasonableness of Cumis counsel’s rate (and possibly work), insured filed a bad faith lawsuit. The trial court granted an insurer’s 2860 arbitration request, prompting a mandate petition by insured.
Insured won.
Because the bad faith action went beyond the normal 2860 arbitration narrow issues, the trial court needed to make a preliminary ruling on the bad faith issues. If the insurer wins, then the 2860 arbitration request could be resurrected. In the end, a timing issue in a case dependent upon very unusual defense acceptance “lag” circumstances.
BLOG UNDERVIEW--Co-contributor Mike spoke at and attended the National Association of Legal Fee Analysis (NALFA) Los Angeles conference yesterday on 2011 Attorney’s Fees. There were four panels, which will be the subject of future blogs on each one. However, Susan P. White of Manatt Phelps & Phillips, LLP did speak on this case, opining it was correctly decided under the circumstances, as a panel member with Andre E. Jardini (of KPC Legal Audit Services, Inc.) and Susan J. Field (of Musick Peeler & Garrett, LLP) on “Insurance Coverage Litigation” Who Pays the Legal Bills?” More to come on the NALFA conference in future posts.
Comments