Legal Opinion

Van Noy v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided June 1, 1999No. 41128-4-IPublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrosse, J.

Insurers have a general duty of good faith in dealing with their insureds. Here, in a class action lawsuit, the representatives of the class (hereinafter rep*489resentatives) have met their initial burden of producing issues of material fact concerning the good faith handling of the claims sufficient to survive summary judgment. In addition, a quasi-fiduciary relationship exists between an insurer and its insured. Here, there is also a question of fact as to whether State Farm Insurance Companies (State Farm) sufficiently disclosed pertinent facts to enable its insureds to protect their interests…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Hangman Ridge Training Stables, Inc. v. Safeco Title InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1986
  2. Tank v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Industrial Indem. Co. of Northwest, Inc. v. KallevigWashington Supreme Court · 1990
  4. Clements v. Travelers Indemnity Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1993
  5. Coventry Associates v. Am. States Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1998

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Hayden v. Mutual of Enumclaw InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Hayden v. Mutual of Enumclaw Ins. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Anderson v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  4. Anderson v. State Farm Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
  5. Van Noy v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 2001

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API