bad faith tort claim (Wisconsin) · Go Syfert
← Wisconsin issues

bad faith tort claim in Wisconsin

8 Wisconsin opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Wisconsin 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Anderson v. Continental Insurancegreen
wis · 1978 · cited in 2 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 1997–2007
2 sentences

2007V ¶ 69 A review of the case law regarding bad faith claims against insurance companies and the "exclusive remedy" provision of the Worker's Compensation Act makes clear that the case law has recognized the tort of bad faith against a worker's compensation insurance carrier and that the Act's exclusivity provision does not bar the tort of bad faith. ¶ 70 The seminal cases on bad faith tort claims against insurance companies are Anderson v. Continental Insurance Co., 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 (1978), and Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co., 86 Wis.2d 615 , 273 N.W.2d 220 (1979). ¶ 7

2007V ¶ 69 A review of the case law regarding bad faith claims against insurance companies and the "exclusive remedy" provision of the Worker's Compensation Act makes clear that the case law has recognized the tort of bad faith against a worker's compensation insurance carrier and that the Act's exclusivity provision does not bar the tort of bad faith. ¶ 70 The seminal cases on bad faith tort claims against insurance companies are Anderson v. Continental Insurance Co., 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 (1978), and Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co., 86 Wis.2d 615 , 273 N.W.2d 220 (1979). ¶ 7

12
Brown v. Labor & Industry Review Commissiongreen
wis · 2003 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015A plaintiff raising a bad faith tort claim against an insurer must prove two elements: (1) "a reasonable insurer under similar circumstances would [not] have denied, suspended, or delayed payment on the claim" and (2) "the insurer knew or recklessly disregarded that there was no reasonable basis for denying benefits." Brown v. LIRC, 2003 WI 142, ¶¶ 24, 26 , 267 Wis. 2d 31 , 671 N.W.2d 279 .

2015A plaintiff raising a bad faith tort claim against an insurer must prove two elements: (1) "a reasonable insurer under similar circumstances would [not] have denied, suspended, or delayed payment on the claim" and (2) "the insurer knew or recklessly disregarded that there was no reasonable basis for denying benefits." Brown v. LIRC, 2003 WI 142, ¶¶ 24, 26 , 267 Wis. 2d 31 , 671 N.W.2d 279 .

11
Danner v. Auto-Owners Insurancegreen
wis · 2001 · cited in 1 Wisconsin opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
1 sentence

2002In Danner , this court affirmed an award of actual attorneys' fees for the underlying contract action, and attorneys' fees in the bad faith action, as compensatory damages. 2001 WI 90, ¶¶ 77, 79 .

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Wisconsin. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Weiss v. United Fire & Casualty Co. green
wis · 1995
2 sentences

2011Similarly, the court concluded in Weiss that, in the context of a bad faith tort claim, an insured is not required to present expert testimony to demonstrate what a reasonable insurer would have done under the circumstances. 197 Wis. 2d at 381-83 .

1996In Weiss v. United Fire & Casualty Co., 197 Wis. 2d 365 , 541 N.W.2d 753 (1995), this court addressed the question of whether an insured can prevail on a bad faith tort claim against an insurer without first introducing expert testimony.

21996–2011
Brethorst v. Allstate Property & Casualty Insurance green
wis · 2011
2 sentences

2015Co., 2011 WI 41 , ¶ 75 n.7, 334 Wis. 2d 23 , 798 N.W.2d 467 (as the plaintiff in a bad faith tort claim "must show that the insurer did not have a reasonable basis for its actions . . ., internal information that would otherwise be privileged is subject to discovery"). ¶ 24.

2015Co., 2011 WI 41 , ¶ 75 n.7, 334 Wis. 2d 23 , 798 N.W.2d 467 (as the plaintiff in a bad faith tort claim "must show that the insurer did not have a reasonable basis for its actions . . ., internal information that would otherwise be privileged is subject to discovery"). ¶ 24.

12015–2015
A.W. Huss Company v. Continental Casualty Company green
ca7 · 1984
1 sentence

2010Huss Co. v. Continental Casualty Co., 735 F.2d 246 (7th Cir.1984), applying Wisconsin law, to conclude that no claim of bad faith is cognizable when the settlement does not exceed the policy limits.

12010–2010
Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co. red
wis · 1979
2 sentences

2007V ¶ 69 A review of the case law regarding bad faith claims against insurance companies and the "exclusive remedy" provision of the Worker's Compensation Act makes clear that the case law has recognized the tort of bad faith against a worker's compensation insurance carrier and that the Act's exclusivity provision does not bar the tort of bad faith. ¶ 70 The seminal cases on bad faith tort claims against insurance companies are Anderson v. Continental Insurance Co., 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 (1978), and Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co., 86 Wis.2d 615 , 273 N.W.2d 220 (1979). ¶ 7

2007V ¶ 69 A review of the case law regarding bad faith claims against insurance companies and the "exclusive remedy" provision of the Worker's Compensation Act makes clear that the case law has recognized the tort of bad faith against a worker's compensation insurance carrier and that the Act's exclusivity provision does not bar the tort of bad faith. ¶ 70 The seminal cases on bad faith tort claims against insurance companies are Anderson v. Continental Insurance Co., 85 Wis.2d 675 , 271 N.W.2d 368 (1978), and Coleman v. American Universal Insurance Co., 86 Wis.2d 615 , 273 N.W.2d 220 (1979). ¶ 7

12007–2007
Crookston v. Fire Insurance Exchange green
utah · 1991
1 sentence

2002Exch., 817 P.2d 789 (Utah 1991) (holding that a bad faith tort claim is not an action on the contract, therefore, since tort of bad faith is not barred by statute of limitations, insureds allowed to recover all damages attributable to the tort).

12002–2002
Heyden v. Safeco Title Insurance green
wisctapp · 1993
2 sentences

1995Co., 175 Wis. 2d 508 , 498 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1993), United Fire contends that the plaintiff cannot prevail on a bad faith tort claim against it without first introducing expert testimony concerning what a reasonable insurer would have done under the particular facts and circumstances to ensure a fair and neutral evaluation of its insured's claim.

1995Co., 175 Wis. 2d 508 , 498 N.W.2d 905 (Ct. App. 1993), United Fire contends that the plaintiff cannot prevail on a bad faith tort claim against it without first introducing expert testimony concerning what a reasonable insurer would have done under the particular facts and circumstances to ensure a fair and neutral evaluation of its insured's claim.

11995–1995

Where else courts name it

WI 8 (1995–2015) IA 7 (1999–2019) CO 5 (1996–2012) AZ 5 (1987–2026) OK 4 (1999–2022) NV 4 (1998–2015) HI 3 (2007–2014) OH 2 (2009–2009)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check