State of Alaska, DFCS, Office of Children's Services v. Brett Lane

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• reversing the district court’s finding that an insurance company had an affirmative duty to initiate settlement negotiations, but suggesting that “an insurance carrier may be required to broach settlement negotiations under some circumstances”
• excess carrier's bad faith claim defeated by insured's agreement and direction to take the case to trial
• Pennsylvania would reject the theory of a direct duty running from primary to excess insurer
• testimony that plaintiffs attorney would have accepted 40% of his calculated damages is “strong evidence that a defense existed” and, thus, was evidence that the insurer was justified in trying the case
• sophisticated insured advised by its own attorneys pressed the case to trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).