Charyulu Ex Rel. Estate of Taputu v. California Casualty Indemnity Exchange

Good Law
523 F. App'x 478
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 11, 201311-16813, 11-16814California890 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff Cindy Charyulu, special administrator of the Estate of Fatu Taputu, appeals the judgment, after a jury trial, entered in favor of the insurance company in her action claiming that the insurance company was guilty of bad faith in failing to settle a claim within the two-week deadline the plaintiffs counsel imposed. The insurance company cross-appeals costs and fees.

Plaintiffs principal argument is that the district court erred in admitting evidence that bore on the motives of the plaintiffs counsel, including the drop dead letter and the demand to prove the absence of other insurance. Plaintiffs argument ignores the fact that in bringing the suit, Plaintiff has put in issue the reasonableness of the conduct of both sides in the litigation. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Miller, 125 Nev. 300 , 212 P.3d 318, 324 (2009) (defining bad faith as the “actual or implied awareness of the absence of a reasonable basis for denying benefits”). The reasonableness of the conduct of the insurer’s counsel must be measured against the corresponding actions of the plaintiffs counsel in this case. There was no error.

Plaintiff also contends that the district court misstated the law…

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.