I’m reading a wonderful book right now called “Young Men and Fire,” by Norman Maclean.  The book is about a horrific forest fire that took place in Montana in 1949.  Amazing how small sparks can result in a conflagration beyond all belief.   Those of us involved in the litigation game are familiar with that problem. 

In ethics or metaphysics, the “law of unintended consequences” states that, for any willed action, there are consequences that occur which are not intended.  The concept has long existed, but was named and popularized in the 20th century by American sociologist Robert K. Merton.

Merton would have been fascinated by laws that were intended

Awhile back on this blog, we were discussing developments in insurance bad faith law, and I hypothesized that Courts were generally more apt to find bad faith in cases involving a carrier’s delay of benefits, rather than outright denial.  But what if the outright denial contains a bald-faced lie, or a deliberate omission?  In that

Got into a discussion recently with some of my policyholder counsel friends. They were lamenting the death of bad faith law in New Jersey.  When a carrier unreasonably denies or delays paying a claim, the key case is supposed to be Pickett v. Lloyd’s, 131 N.J. 457 (1993), which was written by the late

I’m just back from Orlando where I had the opportunity to speak at an ABA conference on business interruption insurance.  During the talk, I referred to a case I often cite, Rawlings v. Apodaca, 151 Ariz. 149, 726 P.2d 565, 1986 Ariz. LEXIS 253 (1986).  For me, the key quote from the case is:

“In

In the last post, we took a look at the Dictiomatic case, in which the policyholder took a beating for overreaching on a business interruption claim.  Turnabout being fair play, let’s now have a look at a recent case in which the insurance company got thumped in the business interruption arena.  The case is Amerigraphics