California Legal Brief

AI-Generated Practitioner Briefs of California Appellate Opinions

insurance

2 opinions tagged “insurance”

Matthews v. Ryan 1/28/26 CA2/1

The Rule of Maynard Matthews et al. v. Patrick Ryan is that a section 998 settlement offer conditioned on consent by the defendant's insurance carrier is valid, under circumstances where the defendant is defended by an insurer whose consent is necessarily required for any settlement regardless of whether such consent is expressly stated in the offer.

City of Riverside v. RLI Insurance Co. 3/20/26 CA4/1

The Rule of City of Riverside v. RLI Insurance Company is that an additional insured has standing to sue both the named insured and the insurer in the same action for breach of contract and bad faith claims, under circumstances where the plaintiff is a first-party additional insured with privity of contract rather than a third-party tort claimant.