Fullerton, CA
Insurance Lawyer at Fullerton, CA
Practice Areas: Insurance
OUTCOME: Reversed
• Court: Arizona Supreme Court • Outcome: Reversed • Summary: This case involved a health insurance dispute where Cavallo argued that Phoenix Health Plans wrongfully denied coverage for medical tre ... atments. The Arizona Supreme Court reversed the appellate and trial court decisions, emphasizing the proper interpretation of the health plan’s terms and the insurer’s obligations under state law.
OUTCOME: Reversed
• Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit • Outcome: Reversed • Summary: The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling, siding with Sovereign on issues related to the denial o ... f legitimate health claims, defamation, RICO, and improper business practices by Centene.
OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff
Dispute over denial of health benefits under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act. The district court granted judgment for plaintiff, holding the Office of Personnel Management's decision to uphol ... d the carrier's denial of benefits was arbitrary and capricious.
OUTCOME: Reversed
• Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit • Outcome: Reversed • Summary: This case revolved around an insurance dispute where Steigleman accused Symetra of wrongful denial of disabilit ... y benefits. The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision, highlighting errors in the lower court’s interpretation of the insurance policy and the handling of the claim by Symetra.
OUTCOME: Plaintiff's verdict; $360,000 recovery of compensatory damages, fees, and costs
The plaintiff was in custody as a pretrial detainee when a Maricopa County detention officer severely beat her without provocation or justification, hospitalizing her with a fractured jaw and two black ... eyes. The court granted summary judgment in plaintiff's favor on the civil rights claim before trial. After a jury trial on the issue of damages, the jury awarded plaintiff $180,000 in compensatory damages and the court later awarded over $180,000 in costs and fees, for a total recovery of over $360,000.
OUTCOME: Affirmed
• Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit • Outcome: Affirmed • Summary: The case involved a dispute over disability insurance benefits. McClure argued that Country Life Insurance Comp ... any wrongfully denied benefits. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the lower court’s decision upholding the jury's verdict and denying Country Life’s motion for new trial.
OUTCOME: Affirmed
• Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit • Date: October 17, 2018 • Case Number: 18-17011 • Type: Civil Rights > Other Federal Civil Rights (NOS 440) • Summary: This case involved ... excessive force by the Sedona Police Department. The Ninth Circuit reviewed the district court’s ruling denying qualified immunity for the officer and affirmed.
OUTCOME: Jury awarded plaintiff $1.5M
After three-week trial, jury found workers' compensation insurance carrier, Zurich, liable for bad faith and punitive damages for its handling of Mr. Hunton's workers' compensation claim. More than a y ... ear before the trial, Zurich had accepted the claim and was paying Mr. Hunton benefits. But the evidence proved Zurich had initially denied the claim and, after accepting it, later terminated Hunton's benefits to appease Hunton's employer, Sundt Construction Co. -- i.e., Zurich's large, premium-paying customer. The evidence established that Zurich's bad faith claims handling was done pursuant to a business model that directs its insurance adjusters to keep the "customer" happy, despite the customer's financial interests being directly contrary to the injured worker's interests. Accordingly, the jury awarded Hunton $500,000 in compensatory damages and $1M in punitive damages.
OUTCOME: $6.7M awarded to plaintiff
The claimant was in his early 40s when he suffered a traumatic brain injury and then developed severe depression leading to multiple hospitalizations for suicidal ideation. McClure's disability insuran ... ce company, Country Life, approved payment of monthly benefits initially, but then unexpectedly terminated the claim a year later. It did so without gathering any of McClure's treating physicians' records for eight to nine months leading up to the claim termination. In its letter terminating benefits, Country Life told McClure that it had carefully reviewed extensive medical records and determined there was no evidence of any cognitive or mental health impairments. McClure was unaware that Country Life did not bother to gather or review recent medical records from his physicians, even those who had certified his disability. The termination of his benefits was financially and emotionally devastating to McClure and his family. McClure's attorneys argued that Country Life took deliberate measures to terminate his claim, blatantly ignoring evidence that he was disabled. The Jury agreed, and found that the termination was done with an "evil mind" and with conscious disregard of the harm McClure would likely suffer. Following three weeks of hearing evidence, the jury deliberated over the course of two days and found Country Life and C.C. Services acted in bad faith and consciously disregarded the risk of harming its insured. The jury awarded $5 Million in punitive damages, $2.5 Million against each company.
OUTCOME: Confidential settlement
Federal District Court judge granted Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions against Country Life for litigation misconduct. Granting Plaintiff's requested relief, the Court struck Defendant's Answer to the C ... omplaint, deemed Plaintiff's allegations of bad faith admitted, and entered default against the defendant. Based on the briefing and a two-day evidentiary hearing, the Court found, in relevant part: "Plaintiff has presented substantial and compelling evidence that demonstrates serious misconduct by Defendant and its counsel in this case. Testimony from the evidentiary hearing, deposition testimony, and documentary evidence, as described above, combine to show a concerted effort to wrongfully withhold evidence, misrepresent the facts, and mislead Plaintiff and the Court to comport with Defendant's and counsels' false narrative. Defendant and its counsel withheld relevant and discoverable evidence by essentially ignoring requests for production of documents and then by frivolously asserting the documents were privileged. They misrepresented the facts surrounding their conduct during discovery by asserting they had conducted reasonable searches in response to Plaintiff's requests when they had not. They misrepresented the facts of the case by redacting highly relevant information and making false assertions of privilege. They then presented false deposition and hearing testimony to align with their fabricated account of what occurred. By doing so, Defendant and counsel sought to prevent Plaintiff and the Court from learning the truth about the circumstances surrounding the termination of Plaintiff's disability claim, thereby misleading Plaintiff and the Court into accepting their narrative. The Court finds that the evidence amply demonstrates that Defendant's and counsels' misconduct was willful and done in bad faith...."
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
