Insurance Disputes: Insured verses Insurer
Attorney Gladish deals with disputes between insurers and insureds on a regular basis. Insurance companies seem to have taken a much more aggressive approach with their insureds as it relates to claims and making payments to their insureds. In the State of Indiana, the insurance company has a duty of good faith and fair dealings that it owes to its insureds. Erie, Ins. Comp. v. Hickman, 622 N.E.2d 515 (Ind.1993). In the Erie case, the Indiana Supreme Court noted that an insurance company was to refrain from making an unfounded refusal to pay policy proceeds; caused an unfounded delay in making payments; deceiving the insured; and/or exercising any unfair advantage to pressure an insured into a settlement claim. The Indiana Supreme Court went on to state that this was not an exclusive list but simply an example of conduct an insurance company is to refrain from in dealing with its insureds.
Attorney Gladish has recently handled a claim where an insured was denied coverage for medical bills incurred while the insured was in the hospital. The insured had received prior consent for medical care and treatment at the hospital from her insurance company which resulted in medical bills to an excess of $(Rule 7.2 does not allow Attorney Gladish to list this amount). After the insured received the medical care and treatment, the insurance company decided to deny the coverage based upon an alleged exclusion contained within the policy of insurance. As a result of the insurance company’s denial, the insured was required to obtain a second mortgage on her home in an attempt to pay medical bills which she had incurred. The insured contact Attorney Gladish in hopes of getting these medical bills paid on her behalf. After a review of the policy and facts of the case demonstrated that the insurance company was acting in bad faith by failing to pay the medical bills the insured had incurred. Attorney Gladish was successful in obtaining a settlement for the insured which was subject to a confidentiality agreement.
In 2007, Attorney Gladish tried the case of Geraldine Jendraszkiewicz v. Allstate Insurance Company, in the Lake Superior Court, Room Two, in East Chicago, Indiana. In that case, the insured of Allstate was attempting to recover under-insured coverage that she had for an automobile accident that had occurred some time earlier. Allstate Insurance Company offered $(Rule 7.2 does not allow Attorney Gladish to list this amount) to resolve the claim. At the time of trial, the insured could only recover up to $(Rule 7.2 does not allow Attorney Gladish to list this amount) of under-insured coverage on her policy with Allstate Insurance Company. After two days of trial, the jury returned a verdict for the insured in the full amount of the insurance policy which was $(Rule 7.2 does not allow Attorney Gladish to list this amount) after approximately fifteen minutes of deliberation. This was the fastest verdict that Attorney Gladish has received during his extensive trial career.