Skip to content

Bad Faith Blog

We cover current issues, highlights and best practices exclusively on claims of bad faith and extra contractual damages.

Bad Faith Blog
July 8, 2020

Indiana Court of Appeals Finds Legal Malpractice Claims are Not Assignable and Voluntarily Providing a Defense Does Not Create a Duty When No Duty to Defend Existed

The Court of Appeals of Indiana held legal malpractice claims are not assignable and affirmed dismissal of a claim against an insurer for vicarious liability for the alleged negligence of retained defense counsel. The Court additionally held when an insurer does not owe a duty to defend or indemnify, it cannot be held liable for a breach of the duty to defend if it voluntarily and gratuitously provided a defense anyway. 

Bad Faith Blog
February 12, 2017

Tri-Partite Relationship Did Not Result in Bad Faith Exposure

Summary: The insureds sued their homeowners’ insurer and the defense attorneys hired by the insurer alleging bad faith in handling their claim, legal malpractice, and breach of fiduciary duty. The insurer resolved the bad faith claim by funding a settlement of the underlying third party claim. The Court of Appeals affirmed judgment entered in favor of the defense attorneys after an analysis of the challenging relationship between insurer, defense attorney, and insured. This case serves as a reminder that proper handling of the tri-partite relationship is necessary whenever the insurer has a duty to defend; otherwise, the insurer may face bad faith exposure.

Bad Faith Blog
March 30, 2015

Your Case is Pending on Appeal? If Malpractice is a Concern, Don’t Forget to Disclose

IntroductionIn Bar Plan Mutual Ins. Co. v. Likes Law Office, LLC, 2015 WL 6023075 (Ind. App. Oct. 15, 2015) (No. 02A03–1502–CT–65), the Indiana Court of Appeals examined an attorney’s duty to disclose a potential claim when completing a malpractice insurance renewal application—particularly when an attorney has a favorable judgment from a state’s intermediate appellate court, but the case is still pending before the state supreme court. The case serves as an apt reminder for attorneys to be mindful of how an appellate reversal could lead to a malpractice claim.