BROADCASTS.com

b'

A Video Recitation of Crisci v. Security Ins. Co. of New Haven, Conn.  

https://zalma.com/blog

 A jury awarded Mrs. DiMare $100,000 and her husband $1,000. After an  appeal (DIMARE V. CRESCI, 58 CAL.2D 292, 23 CAL.RPTR. 772, 373 P.2D 860)  the insurance company paid [66 Cal.2d 429] $10,000 of this amount, the  amount of its policy. The DiMares then sought to collect the balance  from Mrs. Crisci. A settlement was arranged by which the DiMares  received $22,000, a 40 percent interest in Mrs. Crisci\'s claim to a  particular piece of property, and an assignment of Mrs. Crisci\'s cause  of action against Security. Mrs. Crisci, an immigrant widow of 70,  became indigent. She worked as a babysitter, and her grandchildren paid  her rent. The change in her financial condition was accompanied by a  decline in physical health, hysteria, and suicide attempts. Mrs. Crisci  then brought this action.  The trial court found that defendant \'knew that there was a considerable  risk of substantial recovery beyond said policy limits\' and that \'the  defendant did not give as much consideration to the financial interests  of its said insured as it gave to its own interests.\' That is all that  was required. The award of $91,000 must therefore be affirmed.  In determining whether an insurer has given consideration to the  interests of the insured, the test is whether a prudent insurer without  policy limits would have accepted the settlement offer.  Crisci v. Security Ins. Co. of New Haven, Conn., 66 Cal.2d 425, 58  Cal.Rptr. 13, 426 P.2d 173 (Cal. 1967)  ZALMA OPINION   It is important that claims professionals understand why there exists a  tort of bad faith. The treatment of Mrs. Crisci that drove her to  suicide when a minimally $100,000 case could have settled for less than  the policy limits of only $10,000 was egregious. By presenting the  entire decision claims personnel can better understand why they are  required to deal fairly and in good faith when defending an insured and  should determine whether - if there was no limit - the settlement offer  would or should have been accepted.   \\xa9 2021 \\u2013 Barry Zalma  Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an  insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance  claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally  for insurers and policyholders.  He also serves as an arbitrator or mediator for insurance related  disputes. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an  insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in  the insurance business.  He is available at http://www.zalma.com and zalma@zalma.com. Mr. Zalma  is the first recipient of the first annual Claims Magazine/ACE Legend  Award. Over the last 53 years Barry Zalma has dedicated his life to  insurance, insurance claims and the need to defeat insurance fraud. He  has created the following library of books and other materials to make  it possible for insurers and their claims staff to become insurance  claims professionals.