This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

Perspective

May 16, 2014

Time to reconsider the assignability of certain claims

Should California courts rethink the limitations on assignability? It may well be time to reconsider, by following the lead of the courts in Washington. By Joan M. Cotkin


By Joan M. Cotkin


If an insurance company refuses to settle a claim, once liability has become reasonably clear and there is an opportunity to settle within limits, the defending insurer runs the risk of an excess verdict. Once the verdict is secured, the insured has the option of assigning the breach of contract and bad faith claims to the injured person, in return for the plaintiff's covenant not to collect the excess verdict personally from the insured. <...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?

Enewsletter Sign-up