"Just wanted you to say Thank you, too, for being here for all of us. It's a crazy time, as you well know and it's comforting to have a 'voice of reason' around"
About the Amicus Library
Welcome to the Amicus Project library. Here you will find copies of the 400+ legal briefs United Policyholders has filed as an "amicus curiae" (friend of the court) since 1991. We file amicus briefs to help courts respect and effectuate consumers' reasonable expectations of coverage and reach fair results in coverage and claim dispute lawsuits. In addition to calling courts' attention to helpful legal precedents, UP helps judges consider the impact of their decisions on people and businesses that suffer dire consequences when insurance companies put their own profit motives ahead of their customers' best interests.
The United Policyholders Amicus Project is made possible by the hundreds of dedicated policyholder attorneys who generously volunteer their time to write, review and edit our briefs. Click here to view the attorneys who make up our Amicus Project Team.
To request that UP weigh in on a case, please complete this Request Form.
UP chronicled our Amicus Project in a 2011 report titled "Twenty Years Protecting, Defending and Advancing Policyholders Rights"
Based on long-standing Supreme Court precedent relating to prevailing party status under fee-shifting statutes, Social Security disability benefit claimants who win remands are entitled to see... Read more
UP filed a request for publication of a decision supporting the insured’s claim for punitive damages and the application of Kransco (no comparative bad faith) to first party cases.
An insurance company should not be allowed to sell med-pay coverage without informing insured that if they are covered by an HMO, the med-pay coverage is worthless.
Health and Safety Code section 1389.3 was designed to stop the practice of post-claims underwriting. Blue Shield should not be allowed to engage in post-claims underwriting and rescind its policy... Read more
The purpose of UP’s brief was to educate the court on a wide range of insurance policy exclusions that are creating claims disputes.
Doctrine of insurability; personal injury; occurrence.
UP urges the Court to reverse the lower court’s ruling that a Products Completed Operations Hazard provision includes a restrictive condition that the policyholder physically possesses its product... Read more
The genuine dispute doctrine should not apply when the insurer fails to investigate the insured's claim thoroughly and bases its denial of a duty to defend on an insufficient investigation. Indeed... Read more
UP filed a letter brief requesting publication of decision because the case resolves the question of the ability of the policyholder to claim public adjuster fees as an item of damage where... Read more
Claims handling; waiver of defenses not raised in denial letter