|
||||||||||||
|
|
Sign up to receive FORC Journals (and Alerts) via email.
INSURANCE UNDER ESIGN
Thomas A. Player, Esq. Patrick J. Hatfield, Esq. This Article discusses the recently enacted Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (the "Act" or sometimes referred to as "ESIGN") with a particular emphasis on how ESIGN applies to B2B and B2C transactions in the U.S. insurance industry. The topic of electronic signatures is particularly relevant today with the rush by carriers, intermediaries and suppliers to complete more of the business of insurance online.
QUACKENBUSH SCANDAL RAISES LEGAL QUESTIONS
Robert W. Hogeboom, Esq. On July 10, 2000, California Insurance Commissioner, Chuck Quackenbush ("Commissioner") resigned following an investigation by the Assembly Finance and Insurance Committee ("Committee"). In addition to exposing the former Commissioner and other top Department of Insurance ("DOI") officials to potential criminal indictments, two legal issues have arisen; namely the confidentiality of market conduct exams and the settlement authority of the Commissioner for violations of the Insurance Code.
ARE YOUR MEDICAL INFORMATION AUTHORIZATIONS SUFFICIENT?
An individual wants to obtain a life insurance policy. In order to grant that individual's desire, you, the insurance provider, must obtain certain information. So, you have the applicant complete and sign an application which contains language authorizing certain entities who may possess medical information concerning the applicant (such as physicians, hospitals, etc.) to disclose that information to the insurance company. You present the form of authorization to the entities holding the medical information expecting to receive the information in a timely manner. You assume everything is going well until you receive a response from one of the entities telling you that your authorization form does not comply with state and/or federal law requirements regarding the authorization language necessary to allow for disclosure of the type of medical information requested. The entity informs you that you will have to obtain a new, more specific authorization form from the applicant. You attempt to argue with the entity, until it responds that, if the state or federal requirements are not met, then it and/or you could be held liable for unlawful disclosure of the information.
PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL IN INSURANCE BAD FAITH CASES
Angela Ables, Esq. With insurance bad faith cases sprouting up everywhere, plaintiff lawyers have never enjoyed such a busy time. We continue to see multi-jurisdictional lawsuits commenced by plaintiff lawyers who specialize in such cases, utilizing local attorneys to do the local work when necessary. One common theme that seems to run through these cases, whether they are insurance bad faith or health maintenance organization's ("HMO") bad faith allegations, is that plaintiff attorneys seem to be trying to pierce the corporate veil in an effort to reach the corporate parent's pockets.
TEXAS COUNTY MUTUALS: THEIR TRADITION AND THEIR FUTURE
Jack M. Cleaveland, Jr., Esq. Who would have thought back in 1937, when the Texas legislature authorized "county" mutual insurance companies to write limited property and casualty coverage on barns and other farm, dairy, hennery and ranch buildings and improvements, on vehicles, harness, implements, tools and machinery used on farms, dairies, henneries or ranches, and on fowls, domestic animals and livestock, that by 1999 they would collectively write 26.2% of the private passenger automobile insurance premium in Texas? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
