Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith

Insurance Coverage And Bad Faith Law: Counseling, Opinions And Litigation

The lawyers at Houston Harbaugh have built a strong reputation over the past several decades representing insurance companies facing the full spectrum of complex legal challenges. No matter how big or critical the challenge, clients turn to the attorneys in Houston Harbaugh’s Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith practice group for our legal and business insights.

Our insurance industry clients must constantly stay abreast of changes in the law, the courts, and in the regulatory climate, we’re committed to staying on top of the issues of today and tomorrow, such as the ever-changing landscape involving bad faith, cyber-insurance, and insurance for advanced technology sectors, artificial intelligence players, machine learning companies, and autonomous vehicle manufacturers and users.

At the heart of Houston Harbaugh’s Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith practice are first-party and third-party insurance coverage and bad faith lawsuits filed in federal and state courts. These lawsuits have involved a wide variety of matters arising under numerous types of insurance policies, including commercial general liability policies, directors’ and officers’ liability policies, property and casualty policies, professional errors and omissions policies, umbrella and excess policies, life and disability insurance policies, and manuscripted policies covering special risks. The firm routinely provides guidance and advice on all types of insurance.

Bad faith and extra-contractual claims are among the most complex and high-stakes matters that insurance companies face. In today’s legal landscape, many coverage disputes include allegations of bad faith against the involved insurance company. These claims, if successful, can expose insurance companies to punitive damages, attorneys’ fee awards, and other damages well in excess of insurance policy limits. Bad faith claims are fact-specific and focus on the insurance company’s conduct and claims handling practices rather than the express provisions of the insurance policy. Bad faith claims are often asserted by policyholders against insurance carriers for, among other things, failure to defend or settle third-party claims, wrongful denial of coverage for first-party claims, and unreasonable delay in claims handling.

Our understanding of the insurance industry has enabled us to successfully counsel our client’s coverage and bad faith claims and, if necessary, litigate suits through trial when they cannot otherwise be resolved. Our attorneys have extensive experience throughout the entire process of litigating claims involving insurance coverage and bad faith, including discovery, dispositive motions practice, trial, and appeals.

Representative Engagements

• Insurance coverage litigation and monitoring of accounting liability claims in excess of $100 million arising out of the financial failure of a nationwide discount pharmacy chain.
• Representing an insurance carrier in an action initiated by a Fortune 500 company seeking in excess of $100 million insurance coverage for the costs of completing the environmental cleanup of 25 sites contaminated by hazardous wastes and substances.
• Representing excess insurers in indemnity dispute arising from national class action settlement in excess of $100 million involving a national restaurant chain.
• Representing a major regional commercial bank in a claim against a surety company under a banker’s blanket bond for insurance coverage of losses sustained by the bank in connection with a check forgery scheme.
• Representing insurance companies in coverage litigation brought by manufacturers of tobacco products seeking coverage for third-party personal injury claims allegedly arising out of use of tobacco products.
• Representing insurers against claims for coverage arising from mass tort asbestos and silica claims and alleged bad faith.
• Representing insurers in dispute regarding coverage for claims arising out of defective products installed in homes.
• Representing life insurance companies in litigation involving wrongful denial of life insurance benefits.
• Representing long-term care insurance company in litigation involving denial of benefits and alleged bad faith.
• Representing annuity company in litigation involving sale tactics.
• Representing an insurance carrier in an action initiated by a Fortune 500 company seeking in excess of $100 million insurance coverage for the costs of completing the environmental cleanup of 25 sites contaminated by hazardous wastes and substances.
• Representing an excess insurer in coverage and bad faith actions involving thousands of multiple underlying claims arising out of exposures to asbestos, silica and coal dust.
• Representing an insurer against claim for coverage brought by persons exposed to asbestos who had not yet been diagnosed with disease. Reported decision Erdely v. Hinchcliffe and Keener, Inc., et al., 875 A.2d 1078 (Pa. Super. 2005), appeal denied, 890 A.2d 1059 (Pa. 2005).
• Representing insurance company involving coverage issues raised by multiple actions arising out of contaminated pharmaceutical products.
• Representing insurance companies in bankruptcy court involving coverage disputes arising out of asbestos liabilities and attempts to assign policy rights to a trust under plans of reorganization.
• Representing insurance companies which issued environmental remediation bonds in forfeiture litigation initiated by Pennsylvania Department of Environmental protection.
• Representing insurance company in coverage action brought by industrial insured seeking coverage for environmental liabilities under pre-pollution exclusion policies.
• Defense of corporate managing general agent in litigation brought by insurer alleging negligence in insurance underwriting and claims management activities.
• Representation of insurers against claims for coverage arising from mass toxic tort claims and alleged bad faith.
• Representation of excess insurers in indemnity dispute arising from national class action settlement in excess of $100 million involving national restaurant chain.
• Representation of an insurance company in a coverage action involving alleged property damage and advertising injury coverage for alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Reported decision Melrose Hotel Co. v. St. Paul Fire and Marine Ins. Co. 432 F. Supp. 2d 488 (E.D. Pa. 2006), aff’d, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 22711 (3d Cir. Sept. 25, 2007).
• Representation of an insurance company in a coverage action involving an underlying copyright infringement lawsuit and a determination of whether there was “advertising injury” under four commercial general liability policies issued to the corporation by the insurer.