SCHWARTZ v. POIZNER
In October 2005, following an extensive investigation, the Commissioner of the California Department of Insurance (the Commissioner) entered into a settlement agreement with a number of related insurance companies (the insurers) resolving allegations that the insurers' claims-handling procedures violated the Insurance Code.[1] In the present action, plaintiff Rick Schwartz alleges numerous causes of action against the insurers who are parties to the settlement agreement, and also petitions for a writ of mandate directed at the Commissioner. Plaintiff purports to represent classes of California residents holding disability income policies issued by the insurers who, like him, submitted no claims under their policies but allegedly were overcharged for their policies in view of the insurers' unlawfully restrictive claims procedures and who received no benefit under the terms of the settlement agreement. Plaintiff appeals from an order dismissing the petition for a writ of mandate, which sought to compel the Commissioner to pursue additional remedies against the insurers that will inure to the benefit of class members. He contends the trial court erred in concluding that the Commissioner does not have a ministerial duty to seek the additional relief and abused its discretion in failing to seek that relief. Court disagree and shall affirm the order dismissing the action against the Commissioner.
Comments on SCHWARTZ v. POIZNER