Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Saviogreen2 sentences2012Co. v. Savio, 706 P.2d 1258, 1272 (Colo.1985), the statutory claim requires only that a first-party claim be denied without a reasonable basis. 1991In a first-party claim for workers’ compensation benefits, however, the claimant retains control, and the insurer “must be accorded wide latitude in its ability to investigate claims and to resist false or unfounded efforts to obtain funds not available under the contract of insurance.” Savio, 706 P.2d at 1274 . | 4 | 8 |
RHODE ISLAND INSURERS'INSOLVENCY FUND v. Leviton Manufacturing Company, Inc.green2 sentences2016Yet, because the underlying purpose of a net worth provision is shifting losses from insolvency to higher net worth insureds remains the same — whether it involves a first party claim or a recoupment claim — we look to both lines of authority for guidance. ¶35 In Rhode Island Insurers’ Insolvency Fund v. Leviton Manufacturing Company, Inc. , 716 A.2d 730, 734-35 (R.I. 1998), the court analyzed a recoupment provision and explained that by providing "for recovery of payments, as opposed to an outright denial of coverage," the legislature intended "to deliver benefits to those in immediate need . 2016Yet, because the underlying purpose of a net worth provision is shifting losses from insolvency to higher net worth insureds remains the same — whether it involves a first party claim or a recoupment claim — we look to both lines of authority for guidance. ¶35 In Rhode Island Insurers’ Insolvency Fund v. Leviton Manufacturing Company, Inc. , 716 A.2d 730, 734-35 (R.I. 1998), the court analyzed a recoupment provision and explained that by providing "for recovery of payments, as opposed to an outright denial of coverage," the legislature intended "to deliver benefits to those in immediate need . | 2 | 2 |
Weitzman v. Blazing Pedals, Inc.green2 sentences2012In a first-party claim, "the insured 'is asking for payment under the terms of the insurance contract between him and the insurance company, and the insurance company owes [the insured] a duty to adjust his claim in good faith.'" Id. (quoting Weitzman v. Blazing Pedals, Inc., 151 F.R.D. 125, 126 (D.Colo.1998)). 137 The majority holds that a first-party UIM claim is distinguishable from a first-party bad faith claim. 2002Weitzman, 151 F.R.D. at 126 . | 2 | 2 |
Tayler v. Travelers Insurancegreen2 sentences2012In a first-party claim, "the insured 'is asking for payment under the terms of the insurance contract between him and the insurance company, and the insurance company owes [the insured] a duty to adjust his claim in good faith.'" Id. (quoting Weitzman v. Blazing Pedals, Inc., 151 F.R.D. 125, 126 (D.Colo.1998)). 137 The majority holds that a first-party UIM claim is distinguishable from a first-party bad faith claim. 2012Id. 11 36 In ordering the insurance company to produce the claim file, the Tayler court reasoned that a first-party claim for UIM benefits was distinguishable from third-party claims where such information was found to be non-discoverable. | 2 | 2 |
Silva v. Basin Western, Inc.green2 sentences2024(Emphasis added.) ¶18 We have previously analyzed whether reserves, settlement authority, and internal evaluations like the claim evaluation at issue here are discoverable, and 13 we believe that the reasoning of those decisions sheds light on the admissibility question now before us. ¶19 In Silva v. Basin Western, Inc. , 47 P.3d 1184, 1193 (Colo. 2002), we concluded that in a first-party claim between an insured and their insurer, the establishment of reserves and settlement authority could be relevant and discoverable as to whether an insurer adjusted a claim in good faith or properly invest 2012Silva explicitly contrasted the third-party claim at issue in that case with discovery in a first-party claim and acknowledged that "[the scope of discovery of insurance information should be broader in a first-party claim between an insured party and his insurer than in a third-party personal injury claim." Id. at 1192 . 135 To that end, in Tayler v. Travelers Ins. | 1 | 2 |
DSCO, INC. v. Warrengreen1 sentence1997See Savio, 706 P.2d at 1274-75 . [1] The non-breaching party cannot recover for all consequential losses, but rather only those "consequential losses which are the natural, probable, and reasonably foreseeable consequence of a party's failure to perform his contract." DSCO, Inc. v. Warren, 829 P.2d 438, 442 (Colo.App.1991). [2] The reasoning adopted by the majority in this case may potentially expand this exception far beyond the context of commercial sureties. | 1 | 1 |
Anderson v. Continental Insurancegreen2 sentences1985See Anderson, 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 ; Noble v. National American Life Insurance Co., 128 Ariz. 188 , 624 P.2d 866 (1981). 1985See Anderson, 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 ; Noble v. National American Life Insurance Co., 128 Ariz. 188 , 624 P.2d 866 (1981). | 1 | 1 |
Gorab v. Equity General Agents, Inc.green1 sentence1983Farmers Group, Inc. v. Trimble, supra; see also Gorab v. Equity General Agents, Inc., 661 P.2d 1196 (Colo.App.1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Goodson v. American Standard Insurance Co. of Wisconsin
green
1 sentence2004In a first-party claim, like this one, the insured must prove both that the insurer acted "unreasonably under the cireum-stances" and that "the insurer either knowingly or recklessly disregarded the validity of the insured's claim." Goodson, 89 P.3d at 415 (citing Travelers Ins. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Lipton v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences2002See Weitzman, 151 F.R.D. at 126 ; Savoy, 176 F.R.D. at 12; Lipton, 48 Cal.App.4th at 1614 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 341 . 2002See Weitzman, 151 F.R.D. at 126 ; Savoy, 176 F.R.D. at 12; Lipton, 48 Cal.App.4th at 1614 , 56 Cal.Rptr.2d 341 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Suver v. Personal Service Insurance
green
2 sentences1997Id. 1997Id. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Noble v. National American Life Insurance
green
2 sentences1985See Anderson, 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 ; Noble v. National American Life Insurance Co., 128 Ariz. 188 , 624 P.2d 866 (1981). 1985See Anderson, 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 ; Noble v. National American Life Insurance Co., 128 Ariz. 188 , 624 P.2d 866 (1981). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Farmers Group, Inc. v. Trimble
green
1 sentence1983Farmers Group, Inc. v. Trimble, supra; see also Gorab v. Equity General Agents, Inc., 661 P.2d 1196 (Colo.App.1983). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Hawkins v. District Court in & for the Fourth Judicial District
green
1 sentence1982As we made clear in Hawkins , it is as much a part of an insurance company’s normal business activity to investigate potential claims by third parties *723 against its insureds as it is to investigate potential claims by its insureds against itself. 638 P.2d at 1378 . | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.