Poizner

Association of California Insurance Companies v. Poizner

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 3d 458·180 Cal. App. 4th 1029·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 2096
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 30, 2009B208402California9,490 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mallano, J.

In 1988, the voters of California enacted an initiative measure designated on the ballot as Proposition 103. Proposition 103 required approval of insurance rate increases by the Insurance Commissioner of the State of California (Commissioner), provided for consumer participation in the administrative ratesetting process, and permitted the recovery of advocacy and witness fees and expenses (together referred to as compensation) under certain circumstances. This lawsuit involves the validity of the 2006 amendments to regulations permitting consumer interest interveners to obtain compensation for participation in the administrative ratesetting process when an order or decision is issued by the Commissioner on an insurer’s ratesetting application without a formal rate hearing, where, for example, the matter was resolved by a settlement among the parties.

Plaintiffs, the Association of California Insurance Companies, the Personal Insurance Federation of California, the American Insurance Association, and the Pacific Association of Domestic Insurance Companies (Insurance Companies), filed a petition for a peremptory writ of mandate and complaint for declaratory and injunctive…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.