 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sprague v. California Pacific Bankers & Insurance Ltd.12/27/2001
nt Anne A. Nottage as to any claim or cause of action.
6. The Final Order of Dismissal (Rule 28) (Amended Complaint 9/27/96) as to: Jeff H. Reynolds, having been filed in this action on April 6, 2000, no Judgment is entered against Jeff H. Reynolds as to any claim or cause of action.
II. PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION
The questions in this case could have been the following: (1) Was California Pacific an unauthorized insurer? (2) Was California Pacific contractually obligated to defend and cover? (a) If no, who is liable in negligence for the lack of defense and coverage? (b) If yes, what were the terms of, and did California Pacific breach the terms of, its contractual duty to defend and cover? (3) If California Pacific breached its contractual duty to defend and cover, is it liable for (a) bad faith damages and (b) punitive damages? (4) If California Pacific breached its contractual duty to cover, which defendants, if any, are liable under Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) ยง 431:8-204?
In contrast, it appears that the junction created by the answer to the question whether unauthorized insurer California Pacific was contractually obligated to defend and cover was ignored and this case proceeded on the basis of the negligence and fraud involved in dealing with, or being, unlicensed and unauthorized. As noted above, it appears that the act or acts of negligence were related to (a) the placement of the insurance by an unlicensed agent or broker of the insurance with an unauthorized insurer and (b) the insurance by an unauthorized insurer.
At the conclusion of Phase One, the jury decided that California Pacific was negligent, did not commit fraud against the Millards, committed bad faith, entered into a contract for insurance coverage with the Millards that required California Pacific to defend the Millards, and the tragedy to William and Grace Adams and the airplane was not excluded from coverage. In other words, the jury found that California Pacific was liable for negligence, breach of contract, and bad faith.
A transcript of the closing arguments to the jury at the conclusion of Phase Two of the trial is not a part of the record on appeal. A transcript of the court's instructions to the jury states, in relevant part, as follows:
In this case, the issues of negligence, fraud, and bad faith have already been decided in favor of the plaintiffs. The burden is still on the plaintiffs to prove that the negligence, fraud, and bad faith were a legal cause of damage to the Millards and to prove the nature and extent of any damages suffered.
The plaintiffs must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the negligence or bad faith was a legal cause of damage to the Millards. The plaintiffs must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the fraud was a legal cause of damage to the Millards. An act or omission is a legal cause of damage if it was a substantial factor in bringing about the damage. One or more substantial factors such as the conduct of more than one person may operate separately or together to cause an injury or damage. In such a case, each may be a legal cause of the damage.
Under California probate law, a person who has not been seen or heard from for a continuous period of five years by those who are likely to have seen or heard from that person and whose absence is not satisfactorily explained after a diligent search or inquiry is presumed to be dead. A person's death is presumed to have occurred at the end of the period unless there is sufficient evidence to establish that that occurred earlier.
When an insurer breaches its duty to defend, it waives its right to approve of any sett
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Hawaii Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|