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" 

Amicus Library

Allianz Global Risks U.S. Ins. Co., Allianz Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Ace Property and Casualty Ins. Co. et al
Year:
2016
Court:
Oregon Supreme Court
Issue:
Contract Interpretation, Ambiguous terms
State:
Oregon

In an insurer v.

Patriot Cleaning Services v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London
Year:
2016
Court:
California Supreme Court
Issue:
Reasonable Expectations/Contra Proferentem, Contract Interpretation
State:
California

In a theft case, UP submitted a letter supporting review on two grounds: First, the trial and appellate courts erred in allowing a motion for summary judgment to survive despite a reasonable... Read more

Tamarin Lindenberg v. Jackson National Life Ins. Co.
Year:
2016
Court:
Tennessee Supreme Court
Issue:
Punitive Damages, Bad Faith (Tortious Breach of an Insurance Contract)
State:
Tennessee

In many jurisdictions when an insurance company breaches an insurance contract, it not only is required to pay what it owed originally and wrongfully delayed or denied, it also must pay a

Cypress Point Condominium Association v. Evanston Insurance Co. et al
Year:
2016
Court:
New Jersey Supreme Court
Issue:
What is an occurrence, Reasonable expectations
State:
New Jersey

The vast majority of states that have addressed the issue of what is an "occurrence" under a commercial general liability policy have reached the conclusion that construction defect claims are... Read more

Association of California Insurance Companies et al. v. Dave Jones, in his capacity as Insurance Commissioner for the State of California
Year:
2016
Court:
California Supreme Court (California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division One)
Issue:
Replacement Cost Value, Regulatory Authority, Underinsurance
State:
California

In response to the widespread underinsurance crisis following the 2003 and 2007 San Diego wildfires, the California Department of Insurance promulgated a set of regulations which required agents/... Read more

General Refractories v. First State Ins. Co. et al
Year:
2016
Court:
U.S. Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit
Issue:
Contract Interpretation, Ambiguous Terms
State:
Pennsylvania

Under Pennsylvania law, insurers have the burden to prove that an exception applies in order to deny coverage.

Stephen Rumnock v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co.
Year:
2016
Court:
Colorado Supreme Court
Issue:
Protective orders, Claims handling procedures
State:
Colorado

Absent a legitimate justification, insurers may not seek protective orders for internal documents on claims handling procedures sought in discovery which may indicate a pattern and practice, or at... Read more

In the matter of Viking Pump and Warren Pump, insurance appeals
Year:
2016
Court:
New York Court of Appeals
Issue:
Allocation and Contribution, Asbestos/long-tail liabilities
State:
New York

Joined by co-amici  the Asbestos PI Trust, ASARCO Asbestos Personal Injury Trust, Duro Dyne Corporation, ... Read more

R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.
Year:
2015
Court:
Connecticut Appellate Court
Issue:
Allocation and contribution of defense and indemnity costs
State:
Connecticut

Where a business purchases insurance to cover specific risks (here asbestos) an insurer may not "pro-rate" its liability based on an exclusion, when additional, different insurance is not... Read more

Arceneaux et al v. Amstar et al.
Year:
2015
Court:
Louisiana Supreme Court
Issue:
Duty to Defend, Allocation and Contribution
State:
Louisiana

 

Some text

Link