Newsletters

When and whether a vehicle involved in a collision is considered “totaled” is an issue of great angst and confusion for most consumers. Even insurance professionals can get turned around navigating the maze of rules and regulations surrounding the act of “totaling” a vehicle under a policy. It needn’t be all that complicated. This article will help take the guesswork out of when a vehicle is to be deemed a “totaled” or a “total loss” and the resulting responsibilities and ramifications applicable to a salvage title vehicle.

There are 22 million vehicles registered in Texas and 13 million head of cattle. Cattle and cars intersect more often than insurers would like to think about. In fact, in the fall season of September, October, and November, animal collisions in Texas account for 24% of all car crashes. Damages from these collisions amounts to over $1.3 billion annually which means that subrogating these losses has become an important area of claim reimbursement for aggressive and prudent insurers. Subrogating Texas vehicle/livestock collisions, however, is more of a challenge than one might expect. In fact, in many cases, the ability to pursue the livestock owner depends on whether a county has adopted local stock laws.

A mutual insurance company is one which is owned entirely by its policyholders. Subrogating on behalf of a mutual insurance company often requires special handling and techniques considering the nature of the individuals and businesses they insure and the types of losses they frequently encounter. Effectively representing them begins with an understanding of what they are and who they insure.

On January 24, 2020, a massive explosion ripped through the Watson Grinding and Manufacturing facility in northwest Houston. The blast damaged 450 structures in the area surrounding the facility. MWL’s Texas office heard the news a few hours after the explosion and took immediate action on behalf of its clients and retained a fire and explosion team of experts to begin investigation into the root cause of the explosion. MWL will be at the forefront of the investigation actively pursuing subrogation recoveries on behalf of our clients who pay out losses to their insureds as a result of this explosion. If you have claims related to this loss that require subrogation recovery or if you have any questions, please feel free to contact Mark Solomon at [email protected] or Gary Wickert at [email protected]. They can also be reached at 800-637-9176.

Massachusetts federal district court has ruled that tort law does not provide for recovery of “inherent diminution in value” damages by a third-party claimant. The decision is being appealed but appears to clearly place Massachusetts in the group of states that don’t allow for recovery of such damages from a third-party tortfeasor.

Montana remains one of the toughest states to subrogate in because it has a very strict made whole policy. It is the rule in Montana that an insured must be totally reimbursed for all losses as well as costs, including attorney fees involved in recovering those losses, before the insurer can exercise any right of subrogation, regardless of contract language to the contrary.

MWL is pleased to announce that Zahra Aziz has joined our insurance litigation team as a senior associate attorney in our California branch office. Zahra’s litigation experience adds to a wealth of experience at MWL’s Santa Ana office. Zahra’s practice focuses on insurance litigation, especially nationwide insurance subrogation involving workers’ compensation, automobile, health insurance and ERISA, property and casualty, premises liability, insurance coverage, and civil litigation. Zahra is also fluent in Farsi and conversational in Spanish. We look forward to utilizing Zahra’s extensive experience handling subrogation litigation across California

Let’s just say it. Florida PIP subrogation is a pain in the butt. The PIP carrier isn’t subrogated to or has a lien on any tort recovery against the “vehicle” owner, subject to two exceptions: (1) where the third-party tortfeasor is uninsured, and (2) where a commercial vehicle which is not required to have PIP coverage is one of the vehicles involved in the accident. The former is straightforward; but the latter exception is where all the confusion arises.

For many years, Idaho courts had discussed this tort but never formally recognized it. On October 18, 2019, however, the Idaho Supreme Court finally adopted third-party spoliation as an independent tort, which now allows an action for spoliation damages against third parties who are not part of the underlying civil lawsuit.

Maryland Court Confuses Wisconsin Exclusive Remedy Rule. For years, lawyers, judges, and state courts have been confused over the Exclusive Remedy Rule that exists in Wisconsin. The confusion is because prior to 1978, the Exclusive Remedy Rule didn’t apply to actions brought against co-employees, but in 1978 the Act was amended to make the Exclusive Remedy Rule applicable to an action against “any other employee of the same employer.”

An action is usually commenced within the applicable statute of limitations by filing a summons and/or complaint. Filing the complaint, however, is only the first step. Where service of the complaint on defendant isn’t pursued with reasonable diligence or obtained within a prescribed number of days after filing, defendant may argue the statute of limitations has run and the lawsuit should be dismissed, even if it was timely filed.

The new Senate Bill 421, signed on June 20, 2019, amends several aspects of PIP subrogation under either O.R.S. § 742.536 (PIP lien) or O.R.S. § 742.538 (direct PIP subrogation). However, the only real changes the subrogation practitioner will notice in the wake of Senate Bill 421 is that PIP carriers will never again be named together with the insured on settlement checks for PI claims inclusive of PIP. Plaintiffs’ attorneys will feel more emboldened about signing off on indemnity/hold harmless releases where settlements were inclusive of PIP, and then can be expected to stubbornly resist reimbursement arguing their client has not been made whole. Beyond that, you may choose your Shakespearean reference to describe it: either (1) “Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”, or (2) Much Ado About Nothing.

The ability of a landlord’s property insurer to subrogate against a tenant for property damage caused by the negligence of the tenant depends on which state the loss occurs in and the nature and language of the lease involved. Until recently, Pennsylvania had only one case speaking to this issue, but Pennsylvania has finally picked a side on this issue in the 2019 Superior Court decision of Joella v. Cole, 2019 WL 5287987 (Pa. Super. 2019).

The War Hazards Compensation Act (WHCA) applies to U.S. employees and government contractors that perform work overseas who are injured as a result of hostile actions. The statute provides procedures and requirements which, if done properly, allow the employer or carrier to seek 100% reimbursement, including allocated and unallocated expenses – not from a responsible tortfeasor, but the government itself.

For years, the publication of Directive Number 175, issued by the 2003 Louisiana Insurance Commissioner, prevented many insurers from successfully pursuing subrogation claims in Louisiana. However, a recent Court of Appeals’ ruling held that policy terms that disclaim the Made Whole Doctrine are enforceable despite the public opinion of the Louisiana Insurance Commissioner.

The first U.S. liability car insurance policy was written in 1898. You would think that with such a long and storied history, the typical auto insurance policy would have evolved to the point of addressing every potential scenario and eliminating any conceivable ambiguity. However, on May 29, 2019, the South Dakota Supreme Court would discover more appropriately, concoct, a policy ambiguity with the clear intent to thwart legitimate rights of subrogation.

The 2019 National Association of Subrogation Professionals (NASP) Annual Conference will be held October 27 – 30 in Washington, D.C. Its lineup of speakers and topics is very good, as usual. MWL will have many experienced subrogation lawyers there who will be moderating, presenting, or speaking at the conference.

Hospital liens can affect all parties to litigation and can dramatically affect the outcome of litigation. If not properly perfected and “maintained”, hospital liens can be expensive problems for hospitals, physicians, and other health care providers. This article is an overview of hospital lien laws across the country and culminates with a link to a chart detailing the lien laws of all 50 states.

When and how non-material items like labor and general contractor overhead and profit (GCOP) should be included and/or depreciated during the first-party ACV calculation process remains a challenge in every state. This article provides an overview of available state law and precedent regarding inclusion, quantification, and potential depreciation of GCOP in ACV calculations, as well as a link to a 50-state chart on the topic.

Subrogation rights can be lost before they are pursued. New Jersey common law employs an equitable doctrine known as the Entire Controversy Doctrine, that can be a trap for the unwary and used as a secret weapon to destroy subrogation claims. Similar to other states’ prohibitions against “splitting” a cause of action, this doctrine bars a party from commencing multiple lawsuits arising out of a single event or transaction.

Catherine W. Dowie has joined Matthiesen, Wickert & Lehrer (MWL) as an insurance litigation attorney in our Wisconsin office. Catherine is licensed to practice law in Massachusetts and Vermont and her practice focuses on national insurance subrogation with an emphasis on ERISA and health insurance subrogation. Catherine has a vast amount of insurance industry experience, including her 6+ years working with Phia Group. On behalf of the partners, associates, legal assistants, and support staff here at MWL, we would like to welcome Attorney Catherine Dowie to our firm.

Daniels v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2019 WL 2909308 (Wash. July 3, 2019). The Washington Supreme Court decision of Daniels extended the Made Whole Doctrine to deductible reimbursement and more broadly to property damage recoveries where it never has before. Now, whether a reimbursement action or a direct subrogation action, a carrier subrogating under Washington law is precluded from any subrogation recovery unless and until the insured’s damages, including, arguably, the insured’s unliquidated bodily injury damages, are fully compensated.

There is much confusion around the purpose of a workers’ compensation subrogation waiver endorsement. Contrary to what some believe, a waiver of subrogation does not prevent a subcontractor’s employee from suing the contractor. These waivers deprive the small subcontractor of a subrogation recovery and the positive effect such a recovery would have on its risk modifier and future workers’ compensation premiums. This article links to our new 50-state chart on Effect of Workers’ Compensation Subrogation Waiver Endorsement.

ACW Corp. v. Maxwell, 2019 WL 3024049 (Del. Super. 2019). A Delaware Superior Court has issued what constitutes in this author’s opinion one of the top five most illogical workers’ comp subrogation decisions in history. With an incorrect reading of a portion of the Delaware workers’ comp subrogation statute, the court has gutted the important right of subrogation in Delaware and increased the cost of doing business for Delaware small businesses.

MWL is pleased to welcome seasoned trial attorney Bree Madison to the firm as a senior litigating associate. Bree will be working in our Hartford, Wisconsin office and brings with her a wealth of litigation and insurance claims experience. Bree will be handling complex property and casualty subrogation along with workers’ comp and auto subrogation cases in Wisconsin and across the country. Bree’s experience includes preparation and trial of cases in both state and federal court and her experience in large, complex property subrogation losses will provide welcome assistance to a burgeoning large loss property subrogation practice here at MWL.

Carriers Are Only As Secure As Their Weakest Link. Cyber attackers have actively begun turning their sights on insurance companies and law firms. What do you know about the strengths and weaknesses of the cybersecurity measures taken by your subrogation counsel and recovery vendors? This article has ten questions you should ask and, if the answers are not complete and verified, you may be at risk.

Frederking v. Cincinnati Ins. Co., 2019 WL 2751700 (5th Cir. 2019). There is a new 5th Circuit opinion concluding that drunk driving collisions are “accidents.” Had the 5th Circuit upheld the coverage denial by Cincinnati, the ramifications for automobile accident liability coverage would have been cataclysmic.

In re Old Republic Risk Management, 2019 WL 2462486 (Tex. Civ. App.-Tyler 2019). This new decision is an important reminder to carriers and subrogation counsel that care should be taken in representing the payments that are included in a workers’ compensation lien.

In the subrogation world, it’s common knowledge that, in states that allow strict liability claims against entities in the supply chain, Amazon attempts to preclude liability by arguing that it’s not a “seller” of a product. Instead, Amazon has successfully argued that it only provides a platform for a buyer and seller to connect for purchase of a product, so it shouldn’t be subject to strict products liability. However, in two recent decisions, this argument has failed.

We are pleased to welcome trial attorney Mark A. Solomon to the firm. Mark, who is licensed to practice in Texas and Colorado, is the managing partner of MWL’s new Austin, Texas branch office. Mark’s practice focuses on complex property and casualty subrogation, workers’ comp subrogation, and auto subrogation. He brings with him a wealth of litigation and insurance claims experience. Just prior to joining MWL, he was the Supervising Attorney at Farmers Insurance Group, managing a team of seven attorneys, paralegals, and collection specialists throughout the country.

We are also pleased to welcome Jake Simon to the firm. Jake has joined our insurance litigation team as a litigating subrogation associate in our Hartford, Wisconsin office. In 2018, he worked as a law clerk in the Wisconsin office so he isn’t really “new” to the firm. Jake is handling insurance litigation focusing on nationwide insurance subrogation involving health insurance, ERISA, occupational accident claims, workers’ comp, fire and casualty, and auto.

There is an ongoing and heated national debate over the growing practice of law enforcement using red light traffic cameras. While most of the attacks on red light camera systems focus on their use as an aid to law enforcement, from a legal perspective, their use is invaluable when it comes to litigation involving intersection collisions.

Ridesharing in New York has created confusion over New York no-fault insurance and PIP Loss Transfer. In April 2019, the New York Department of Financial Services issued “Insurance Circular Letter No. 4” opining that an insurer should not invoke intercompany loss transfer provisions solely based on one of the vehicles being a rideshare vehicle.

On June 14, 2019, the Kansas Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that changes the landscape of personal injury and workers’ compensation third-party cases. This decision will have significant ramifications for Kansas tort and third-party action lawsuits, because liability carriers intentionally stingy in Kansas due to the limited downside will now have to rethink how they approach and settle liability cases.

On May 9, 2019, the Louisiana Supreme Court issued an important opinion restricting application of the Collateral Source Rule in personal injury lawsuits. This case will impact workers’ compensation subrogation recoveries in Louisiana by reducing the overall pool of recovery money subject to subrogation.

Insurance claim files are overflowing with losses involving individuals injured when they trip and fall over cracked, broken, or uneven municipal sidewalks. Most often, the injury is a direct result of a municipality failing to institute and/or follow its own policies regarding inspection, maintenance, and repair of miles of sidewalks. Whether a municipality can be held liable for sidewalk defects depends heavily on the state you are in and, in many cases, the specific city or municipality you are dealing with.

On April 19, 2019, Arizona joined 47 other states who have passed laws governing the use of handheld phones and/or texting while driving. Under the new law, drivers are prohibited from any kind of cell phone use while driving, including talking, texting, typing, or browsing internet or social-media sites, unless they are using a hands-free mode.

A New Jersey Superior Court judge recently issued a written ruling, holding that it was inappropriate for a lawyer to question his client during trial as to whether his vehicle was “totaled” as a result of an accident with the defendant’s vehicle. The judge relied entirely on a MWL’s Automobile Total Loss Thresholds In All 50 States chart and a Claims Journal article entitled “When is a Vehicle Considered a Total Loss.” It was the first ruling of this sort made in a New Jersey state court.

Stephen Smith will present a live MWL webinar on “Iowa Workers’ Compensation Subrogation: Simple Steps To Avoid Subrogation Traps” on June 12, 2019 at 10:00-11:00 a.m. (CDT). Iowa’s workers’ comp statute is perhaps one of the most complicated in the country. This webinar will give an overview of the rights, duties, and deadlines pertinent to securing recovery in Iowa, and provide a road map to avoid common pitfalls along the way. This webinar is free to attend for anyone interested in maximizing their subrogation recoveries in Iowa.

On May 1, 2019, MWL celebrated the opening of its Austin, Texas office. To commenorate the opening our Texas office, we are offering a special one-hour webinar focusing on the nuances and details of Texas automobile subrogation. Whether you are sharpening your subrogation tools or new to the industry, this is a webinar you won’t want to miss. It will be presented July 16, 2019 by Attorney Lee Wickert of our new Austin office beginning at 10:00 a.m. (CDT).