Federal Case

How courts have described this case

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

• fact that insurer disputes reasonableness of insured's settlement with third party does not excuse it from obligation to pay prejudgment interest
• “notice to a primary carrier generally ensures a competent and inteUigent defense.”
• “The mere interference with Lexington’s right to ‘associate’ in the defense of the claim is too amorphous and cannot itself constitute prejudice unless Lexington can demonstrate that earlier notice would probably have led to a more advantageous result.”
• “the transcripts of the [settlement] hearings were admissible to indicate the terms of the settlement, but insofar as the district court permitted the jury to conclude that the settlement was reasonable on the basis of [the settlement] judge’s statements ... it erred.”
• “Once the insurer had repudiated its contract of insurance, its insured must be allowed to negotiate a settlement that protected the interests for which it purchased insurance . . . [e.g.] the threat that [the plaintiffs’ claims] would put it out of business.”
• discussing the differences among jurisdictions on this issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).