Blady Workforce Law Group's experienced attorneys represent both policyholders (individuals and businesses) and insurance companies in the handling of insurance coverage claims and bad faith lawsuits involving:
- Auto/Car/Vehicle/Truck Insurance
- Commercial Insurance (CGL Policies)
- Errors & Omissions (E&O) Insurance
- Life and Disability Insurance
- Business Insurance
- Professional Liability Insurance
- Officer & Director Insurance
- Employment Practices Liability
- Property Insurance
- Homeowner Insurance
Representation of Policyholders/Insureds
Blady Workforce has successfully assisted policyholders, both businesses and individuals, with insurance claims, including assisting them in obtaining appropriate coverage for a claim; and pursuing claims against an insurance company for the wrongful or unreasonable denial of a claim and the unreasonable handling of a claim (bad faith). An insurance company may be found to have acted in bad faith for:
- Unreasonably denying an insurance claim
- Failing to pay policy benefits
- Failing to defend or settle a claim against an insured within the policy limits
- Conditioning payment of settlement on an undisputed portion of an insurance claim on settlement of the disputed portion
- Deceiving, defrauding and/or misrepresenting coverage to avoid paying insurance benefits
- Delaying payment of insurance benefits
- Inadequately or improperly investigating a claim
In handling a matter for a policyholder, Blady Workforce fights for its clients to ensure that they get the insurance coverage and policy benefits they are entitled to.
Representation of Insurance Companies
Blady Workforce’s attorneys have over 20 years experience representing insurance companies on coverage matters and insurance litigation. In representing insurance companies, Blady Workforce performs coverage analysis, assistance in the investigation of claims, and defends carriers against breach of contract and bad faith claims.SAMPLES OF CURRENT OR PAST SUCCESSFUL REPRESENTATION:
- Uninsured Motorist Breach of Contract /Bad Faith Action Against Insurer
Blady Workforce Law Group successfully represented an insured against a major auto insurance company in California who denied his uninsured motorist bodily injury claim. After the insurance company sued its insured for declaratory relief claiming there was no coverage, BW Law Group filed suit against the insurance company for breach of contract and bad faith. Blady Workforce Law Group successfully and efficiently prosecuted that action, leading to an amicable settlement.
- Coverage Action for a Business Against Insurers
Blady Workforce Law Group successfully represented a Los Angeles based business in a coverage dispute with its commercial general liability insurer and property insurer. The claim against the business involved the alleged improper disposal of a client's furniture. After initially agreeing to defend the client, the commercial general liability insurer filed an action for declaratory relief, claiming there was no coverage under its policy for the claim. The property insurer outright denied the claim for the disposed property. BW Law Group defended the business in the declaratory relief suit and sought coverage from the property damage insurer, leading to a global resolution of the claims against the business, with both the liability insurer and property insurer paying to resolve the claim and the business receiving money for its losses.
- Summary Judgment in Favor of Client on Coverage Dispute
Blady Workforce Law Group obtained summary judgment for an insurer in a coverage action regarding a claim for damaged property. The insured was a truck driver hauling cheese from California to Texas. The shipment of cheese was rejected by the recipient for being out of temperature. The insured claimed the loss was due to a mechanical failure or breakdown of his temperature controlled trailer. However, the insurance policy provided limited coverage for such a loss. BW Law Group successfully moved for summary judgment for the insurance company, proving to the Court that that there was no coverage because there was no evidence of a mechanical failure or breakdown of the insured's temperature controlled trailer, which was required for coverage to exist.