Olmstead

Olmstead v. Arthur J. Gallagher & Co.

Good Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 3d 298·2004 Cal. LEXIS 2554·2004 Daily Journal DAR 3826·32 Cal. 4th 804·86 P.3d 354
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 29, 2004S113272California5,576 words

Opinion

Opinion

Baxter, J.

We granted review in this case to address whether Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5, as amended in 1994, authorizes trial courts to award sanctions, including attorney fees, for bad faith litigation actions or tactics that arise from a claim initiated after December 31, 1994. We conclude that the statutory language of section 128.5 and related statutes, and other indicia of legislative intent, establish that section 128.5 does not apply to conduct arising from a claim initiated after December 31, 1994. To the extent the Court of Appeal reached a contrary result, its judgment must be reversed.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

As the result of a September 1999 auto accident, plaintiffs—Carleen Olmstead and Cheri Rose—sued defendants—Arthur J. Gallagher & Company (Gallagher), an insurance broker, and Vicki Sundgren, a Gallagher representative—to recover underinsured motorist benefits allegedly due under an insurance policy. Following a trial, the jury returned a defense verdict on all claims. After entry of the judgment, defendants moved, under sections 128.5 and 128.7, to recover attorney fees and expenses they allegedly incurred as a result of misconduct by plaintiffs…

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.