Fear Not Law Articles: LAURA RAPPAPORT-SCOTT v. INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB

LAURA RAPPAPORT-SCOTT v

LAURA RAPPAPORT-SCOTT v. INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB

Filed 1/11/07

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

LAURA RAPPAPORT-SCOTT,

Plaintiff and Appellant,

INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTOMOBILE CLUB,

Defendant and Respondent.

B184917

(Los Angeles County

Super. Ct. No. BC320667)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ronald M. Sohigian, Judge. Affirmed.

Law Offices of Kenneth L. Schreiber and Kenneth L. Schreiber for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Ford, Walker, Haggerty & Behar, Timothy L. Walker and Jay D. Brown for Defendant and Respondent.

Laura Rappaport-Scott appeals a judgment dismissing her complaint against her automobile insurer, Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club (Interinsurance), after the sustaining of a demurrer without leave to amend. She contends Interinsurance unreasonably and in bad faith refused her demand to settle her claim for benefits for bodily injury caused by an underinsured motorist before submitting the claim to arbitration. We conclude that the facts alleged in the complaint are insufficient to state a cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and therefore affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

1. Factual Background

Interinsurance issued an automobile insurance policy to Rappaport-Scott including coverage for bodily injury caused by uninsured and underinsured motorists. Under the terms of that coverage part, Interinsurance agreed to pay all sums that the insured was â€

Description	Rule that an insurer's failure to accept a reasonable settlement offer within policy limits can support tort liability for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, applicable to third party settlement offers, does not apply to insured's demand that insurer offer a reasonable settlement of an uninsured/underinsured motorist claim. Vast difference between losses claimed by insured and actual losses as determined by arbitrator demonstrated, as a matter of law, that a genuine dispute existed as to the amount payable on underinsured motorist claim, barring insured's cause of action for bad faith delay in making payment.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.