Last updated: March 22, 2012 SYLLABUS Insurance Law A583, Spring 2012 Compressed Schedule Karen Southworth Weaver Soha & Lang, P.S. 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, Washington 98101 tel: 206-654-1691; e-mail: weaver@sohalang.com Law School Office Hours: by appointment Law School Secretary: Ann Bates ambates@u.washington.edu Class meets in room 116 William H. Gates Hall on Mon./Wed. 8:30a.m. – 10:20am, plus Fri., 4/13 and Fri., 4/27, same time, loc. TBA. Handouts available on course website. Learning Goals Insurance law may not initially sound like the most interesting subject in the world (ahem), but past students have repeatedly told me that this was the single most useful course they took in law school. If you practice civil law, you will absolutely have occasion to refer back to concepts and issues we cover in this class. Insurance issues permeate civil law, especially civil litigation. By the end of this course a successful student will have learned: 1) how insurance works, what types of risks are suitable for private insurance and what risk characteristics are “uninsurable”; 2) basic principles of risk management; 2) how to read and interpret an insurance policy; 3) fundamental principles and characteristics of property & casualty insurance; 4) what is a liability insurer’s “duty to defend”; 5) what is a “reservation of rights” and what are its consequences to insurer and to insured; 6) multiple theories of insurer extracontractual liability (aka “bad faith” law); 7) you will be familiar with key Washington insurance cases; and 8) you will impress the heck out of attorneys and judges you may work with as a summer associate, an intern, a clerk, or as a new practicing lawyer. You will also gain a good idea of basic coverages you, as an individual, should be carrying to protect yourself and your loved ones. Plus, we have fun. Attendance This course is on the compressed class schedule. Our last day of class is May 16. The final exam will be on the date assigned by the law school. The law school requires that each student attend at least 80% of class sessions in each course. Due to the compressed schedule, the nature of this topic and the lack of a suitable textbook, class attendance is, in fact, extremely important. If you miss classes, you will be at a severe disadvantage. I will ask the law school to record the first week of class, so that anyone joining the class late will not have missed those sessions. Recording thereafter, however, will depend on having enough students actually attend class in person. We will discuss this on the first day of class. Page 1 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 Course Materials There is no casebook for this class. I have reviewed many published casebooks, and they are simply unsatisfactory. Course materials will therefore consist of a combination of handouts and of published cases, statutes and regulations. Handouts will be posted on the course website. In the past, students have preferred to print the legal sources themselves, off of Lexis or Westlaw, or to copy them from the published reporters. Absent a class consensus to the contrary, that is how we will proceed, however we will discuss this issue on the first day of class. The cases I assign for reading are, by and large, classic insurance coverage cases that you will have occasion to consult again and again once you are in practice, especially if you practice in the State of Washington. Some cases will be relevant to several different assignments. I recommend that you print the cases out and put them into a three-ring binder for repeated reference. Grading and Written Assignments All students must take the final exam. Due to the compressed schedule there will be no research paper option this year. All written work will be graded on a “blind” basis, using student numbers, with answers submitted through Academic Services. I will seek an exemption from curve grading for this class, though I cannot guarantee the school will give an exemption. Your final grade will be calculated as follows: 15% - “Basic Fact Pattern” (take-home). This assignment will be CR/NC, but if the answer shows significant problems with subject mastery, you will have to re-do it to obtain CR. You will have one opportunity to resubmit an answer which is initially graded NC. 15% - Write a “reservation of rights” letter based on a fact and coverage scenario that will be provided (take-home). This assignment will be graded. There will be one “re-do” opportunity (optional) and the highest of the two grades will be used. 20% - “Claim Problem” (take-home). This will be graded. There will be no “re-do” opportunity on this assignment. 50% - Final Exam (non-take-home). The final will consist of one or two “fact patterns” with questions to be answered from each fact pattern. There may be one additional question which would be more theoretical in approach. All necessary insurance policy language will be provided. In the past, my exams have been limited open book, meaning that you may only rely on materials that were part of the class assignments and on notes that you have personally created and/or that are from a study group to which you have actually contributed written work product. No hornbooks, nutshells, or other commercially prepared materials that were not part of class materials are permitted. No internet access. The Honor Code applies and will be enforced. We will discuss computer usage for exams the first week of class. Reading Assignments The following schedule of reading assignments is current as of the beginning of the quarter, and is subject to modification as the quarter progresses. There may be occasions where a topic assigned for one class session will run over into a subsequent class session. Students are responsible for making themselves aware of what readings are required for any particular class session, as announced during prior classes. Depending on student plans for geographic and subject matter practice, and on the possibility of outside speakers, I may assign additional or substitute readings during the quarter. Page 2 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 You will note that one class session currently has no assigned topic or reading. I have built this in as a “catch-up” class session. We definitely will meet that day, and you will be notified in advance of the topic and readings for that day. Where page numbers are in boldface, only the boldfaced pages are assigned. Class Date Topic Reading Assignment M 03-26-12 Introduction to Class Risk Management What is Insurance Types of Insurers Regulation of Insurance Handout 1 – “Insurance Intro” (begins with “A Brief History of Insurance”, by Richard S.L. Roddis) W 03-28-12 Characteristics of Insurable Loss Review of Handout 1 Handout 2 – Insurable Interest 2011 Insurable Interest: Life Insurable Interest Life: In re: Estate of D’Agosto, 134 Wn. App. 390, 139 P.3d 1125 (2006). RCW 48.18.020 - .030. Insurable Interest Property: Gossett v. Farmers, 133 Wn.2d 954, to 974 only, 948 P.2d 1264 (1997). RCW 48.18.040 - .050. Insurable Interest: Property M 04-02-12 W 04-04-12 Measuring Loss Handout 3 – Measuring Loss Rev. 2011 RCW 48.27.010-020; Allemand v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 160 Wn. App. 365, 248 P.3d 111 (2011), review granted, 171 Wn.2d 1028 (2011). Co-insurance Wetmore v. Unigard Ins. Co., 125 Wn.App. 938, 107 P.3d 123 (2005) (coinsurance). Subrogation Mahler v. Szucs, 135 Wn.2d 398, 398421, 957 P.2d 632 (1998); Leader National v. Torres, 113 Wn.2d 366, 779 P.2d 722 (1989). Reading a Policy Find and bring an insurance policy to class (preferably a policy of your own); CG 00 01 12 04 will be provided – bring Page 3 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 this to future class sessions. Rules of Interpretation Rules of interpretation: MacDonald v. State Farm, 119 Wn.2d 724 (facts and 733-36 only), 837 P.2d 1000 (1992). st 1 party/3rd party: Rones v. Safeco, 119 Wn.2d 650, 835 P.2d 1036 (1992). 1st party/3d party/Standing M 04-09-12 Reading Personal Lines Policy Homeowners versus Auto Property versus Liability “Basic Fact Pattern” will be Auto Coverages other than UIM handed out; answers due to Academic Services on Monday, 4/16, before end of class on 4/16 Personal lines policy will be provided. If you have your own to refer to, you will learn something about your own coverage. Handout - Weaver, “Personal Auto Coverages in Washington” (including update); State Capital Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 318 N.C. 534, 350 S.E.2d 66 (1986) (including dissents); PIP Coverage: RCW 48.22.005, .085-.100; WAC 284-30-500 (PIP) Begin UIM RCW 48.22.030-.040 (UIM) W 04-11-12 UIM Coverage (cont.) Subrogation and Setoff revisited RCW 48.22.030-.040 Hamilton v. Farmers Ins., 107 Wn.2d 721, 733 P.2d 213 (1987); Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Tripp, 144 Wn.2d 1, 1-19, 25 P.3d 997 (2001); Bohme v. Pemco Mut. Ins. Co., 127 Wn.2d 409, 899 P.2d 787 (1995). F 04-13-12 The Fortuity Requirement: Accident in 1st Party Policies Known Loss Accidents and Accidental Losses/Occurrences in 3rd Party Policies Hillhaven Properties, Ltd. v. Sellen Constr. Co., Inc., 133 Wn.2d 751, 948 P.2d 796 (1997). Safeco v. Butler, 118 Wn.2d 383, 386-88, 400-03, 823 P.2d 499 (1992) (full case used on subsequent topics). Page 4 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 M 04-16-12 “Basic Fact Pattern” answer due to Academic Services before end of class CG 00 01 12 04 – read insuring agreement and exclusions for Section I.A. “Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability”. CGL History, structure “occurrence” Who is Insured o Named/by def’n o Separability o Additional Insureds History: Queen City Farms v. Central National, 126 Wn.2d 50, 75-76 only (1994). “Occurrence”/ Accident: E-Z Loader Boat Trailers, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 106 Wn.2d 901, 726 P.2d 439 (1986). Queen City Farms v. Central Nat’l Ins. Co., 126 Wn.2d 50, 64-72 only (1994). Safeco v. Butler, 118 Wn.2d 383, 386-88, 400-03, 823 P.2d 499 (1992). Who is Insured: Unigard v. Leven, 97 Wn.App. 417, 983 P.2d 1155 (1999). Separability and Additional Insureds: Truck Ins. Exch. v. BRE Properties, 119 Wn. App. 582, 81 P.3d 929 (2003). Look for separability language in CG 00 01 12 04 (look in CGL “Conditions”) [Optional: Oregon’s approach to additional insureds: Walsh Constr. v. Mut. of Enumclaw, 338 Ore. 1, 104 P.3d 1146 (2005).] W 04-18-12 CGL cont. Insuring agreements o BI/PD Bodily Injury and “occurrence”: E-Z Loader Boat Trailers, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 106 Wn.2d 901, 726 P.2d 439 (1986). “Property Damage”: Prudential Prop & Cas. Co. v. Lawrence, 45 Wn. App. 111, 724 P.2d 418 (1986). Page 5 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 (W 04-18-12, cont.) M 04-23-12 Reservation of rights assignment will be handed out. Answers due to Academic Services by end of class on Monday, April 30. Personal Injury/Advertising Injury: Read CG 0001 policy language for “Section I - Coverage B – Personal and Advertising Injury Liability” insuring agreement and definitions o ”Personal Injury”/ of “advertisement”, “advertising Advertising injury”, “personal injury”, and Injury “personal and advertising injury”; Amazon.com Int’l, Inc. v. American Dynasty Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 120 Wn. App. 610, 85 P.3d 974 (2004); Auto Sox USA, Inc. v. Zurich N. Am., 121 Wn. App. 422, 88 P.3d 1008 (2004). Claims Made/Occurrence [no assigned reading] Common Exclusions Exclusions: look over the exclusions in Coverage I.A.2. Duty to Defend: What is duty to defend Rules for determining whether insurer has duty to defend or not Scope of defense that must be provided Reservation of Rights Defense Ethical Issues Rules for Determining DD: Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751 (2002); Amer. Best Foods, Inc. v. Alea London, Ltd., 168 Wn.2d 398, 229 P.3d 693 (2010); R.A. Hanson Co. v. Aetna Ins. Co., 26 Wn. App. 290, 296, 612 P.2d 456 (1980). Reservation of Rights Defense (WA): Tank v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 105 Wn.2d 381, 715 P.2d 1133 (1986). Ethical Issues: Tank v. State Farm, supra; Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Ben Arnold-Sunbelt Beverage Co., 433 F.3d 365 (4th Cir. 2005) (excellent survey of nationwide law) W 04-25-12 Duty of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Nature, Source, Scope of Duty Standing Remedies RCW 48.01.030 RCW 48.30.010 Note: The following cases are relevant to several class sessions. These are classic, very important bad faith cases. Read them in full, read them well. Page 6 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 (W 04-25-12, cont.) Tank v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 105 Wn.2d 381, 715 P.2d 1133 (1986); Safeco Ins. Co. of Amer. v. Butler, 118 Wn.2d 383, 823 P.2d 499 (1992); Kirk v. Mt. Airy Ins. Co., 134 Wn.2d 558, 951 P.2d 1124 (1998); Coventry Associates v. American States Ins. Co., 136 Wn.2d 269, 961 P.2d 933 (1998); Mut. of Enumclaw v. Dan Paulson Constr., 161 Wn.2d 903, 169 P.3d 1 (2007); St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Onvia, 165 Wn.2d 122, 196 P.3d 664 (2008); Amer. Best Foods, Inc. v. Alea London, Ltd., 168 Wn.2d 398, 229 P.3d 693 (2010). CPA & IFCA Claims: RCW 19.86.090 (CPA) RCW 48.30.015 (IFCA) WAC 284-30-300 to 380 Indus. Indem. Co. of the NW v. Kallevig, 114 Wn.2d 907, 921 only, 792 P.2d 520 (1990). F 04-27-12 M 04-30-12 Reservation of rights assignment due to Academic Services by end of class today. “Claim Problem” will be handed out. Answers due to Academic Services by end of class on Monday, May 7. Good Faith cont. Remedies (cont.) IFCA “Reasonableness Hearings” and associated issues Handout: IFCA for Regulators Cases listed in 4-25-12 assignment RCW 4.22.060 Besel v. Viking Ins. Co., 146 Wn.2d 730, 735, 49 P.3d 887 (2002). Chaussee v. Maryland Casualty Co., 60 Wn.App. 504, 803 P.2d 1339 (1991). Handout: Covenant Judgments – TEK (on course website) [Optional: Handout - Water’s Edge Homeowners Assoc. v. Water’s Edge Assocs., Clark County Cause No. 05-203446-1 (“Ruling on Reasonableness Hearing”, 01/28/2008) (on course website).] Page 7 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 W 05-02-12 Primary/Excess Insurance Diamond Heights Homeowners Assoc. v. Nat’l Amer. Ins. Co., 277 Cal Rptr. 906 (1991) (Parts I and IV only); M. Marick, “Éxcess Insurance: An Overview of General Principles and Current Issues,” 24 Tort & Ins. Law J. 715 (1989). Review: Prudential Prop & Cas. Co. v. Lawrence, 45 Wn. App. 111, 724 P.2d 418 (1986). Union Carbide Corp. v. Affiliated FM Insurance Co., 16 N.Y.3d 419, 947 N.E.2d 111, 922 N.Y.S.2d 220, 2011 WL 588470 (NY Ct. App.) (2011) (annualization of limits in following form policy). “Other Insurance” Clauses New Hampshire Indem. Co. v. Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 148 Wn.2d 929, 64 P.3d 1239 (2003); Mission Ins. Co. v. Allendale Mut., 95 Wn.2d 464, 626 P.2d 505 (1981). [Optional: Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Oregon Auto. Ins. Co., 219 Or. 110, 341 P.2d 110 (1959), as modified by 219 Or. 110, 346 P.2d 643 (1959) (minority rule).] M 05-07-12 Answer to “Claim Problem” due to Academic Services by end of class today. Trigger / Proration / # Occs Trigger of Coverage Proration of Coverage Number of Occurrences Trigger of Coverage: Gruol Construction v. INA, 11 Wn.App. 632, 524 P.2d 427 (1974).) Handout: KSW Trigger of Coverage Paper (on course website) (Classic but optional reading: Keene v. INA, 667 F.2d 1034 (D.C. Cir. 1981)). Allocation: Northern States Power Co. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, 523 N.W.2d 657 (Minn. 1994); Number of Occurrences: Transport Indem. v. Lee Way Motor Freight, 487 F. Supp. 1325 (N.D. Tex. 1980) Page 8 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 KSW Trigger of Coverage Paper (above) [Optional: Contribution Claim Bars: Puget Sound Energy v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, 134 Wn. App. 228, 138 P.3d 1068 (2006).] W 05-09-12 Trigger/Proration/# Occs (cont.) Efficient Proximate Cause Efficient Proximate Cause Rule: Graham v. Pub. Employees, Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Wn.2d 533, 656 P.2d 1077 (1983). Villella v. Pub. Employees Mut. Ins. Co., 106 Wn.2d 806, 725 P.2d 957 (1986). Toll Bridge Auth. v. Aetna Ins. Co., 54 Wn. App. 400, 773 P.2d 906 (1989). Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. Co. v. Patrick Archer Constr. Co., 123 Wn. App. 728 (2004). M 05-14-11 Policy Conditions Notice/Cooperation Voluntary Payments Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Ben Arnold-Sunbelt Beverage Co., 433 F.3d 365 (4th Cir. 2005) (previously assigned); Unigard v. Leven, 97 Wn. App. 417, 983 P.2d 1155 (1999) (previously assigned); Canron v. Federal Ins. Co., 82 Wn. App. 480, 918 P.2d 937 (1996) (thru section III, p. 492). W 05-16-11 LAST DAY OF CLASS Catch up on prior topics REVIEW all topics Probable instructor evaluation No new reading Topic Not Currently Assigned Effectuation and Termination of Coverage Isaacson v. DeMartin Agency, Inc., 77 Wn. App. 875 (1995); Statewide Ins. v. Dewar, 143 Ariz. 553, 694 P.2d 1167 (1984); Anderson v. Vrahnos, 149 Ill. App. 251, 500 N.E.2d 1986). Please feel free to contact me with any questions. You can easily reach me via email or phone. I would be happy to correspond by those means or to meet with you at the law school at an agreed time. email: weaver@sohalang.com tel: 206-654-1691 (direct) Page 9 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 List of Assigned Readings as of first day of class (Instructor reserves right to change or supplement) Cases Allemand v. State Farm Ins. Cos., 160 Wn. App. 365, 248 P.3d 111, review granted, 171 Wn.2d 1028 (2011). (We will be watching for WA Supreme Court decision.) Amazon.com Int’l, Inc. v. American Dynasty Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 120 Wn. App. 610, 85 P.3d 974 (2004). Amer. Best Foods, Inc. v. Alea London, Ltd., 168 Wn.2d 398, 229 P.3d 693 (2010). Auto Sox USA, Inc. v. Zurich N. Am., 121 Wn. App. 422, 88 P.3d 1008 (2004). Besel v. Viking Ins. Co., 146 Wn.2d 730, 735, 49 P.3d 887 (2002). Bohme v. Pemco Mut. Ins. Co., 127 Wn.2d 409, 899 P.2d 787 (1995). Canron v. Federal Ins. Co., 82 Wn. App. 480, 918 P.2d 937 (1996) (thru section III, p. 492). Chaussee v. Maryland Casualty Co., 60 Wn.App. 504, 803 P.2d 1339 (1991). Coventry Associates v. American States Ins. Co., 136 Wn.2d 269 (1998). Diamond Heights Homeowners Assoc. v. Nat’l Amer. Ins. Co., 277 Cal Rptr. 906 (1991) (Parts I and IV only). E-Z Loader Boat Trailers, Inc. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 106 Wn.2d 901, 726 P.2d 439 (1986). Gossett v. Farmers, 133 Wn.2d 954, to 974 only, 948 P.2d 1264 (1997). Graham v. Pub. Employees, Mut. Ins. Co., 98 Wn.2d 533, 656 P.2d 1077 (1983). Gruol Construction v. INA, 11 Wn.App. 632, 524 P.2d 427 (1974). Hamilton v. Farmers Ins., 107 Wn.2d 721, 733 P.2d 213 (1987). Hillhaven Properties, Ltd. v. Sellen Constr. Co., Inc., 133 Wn.2d 751, 948 P.2d 796 (1997). In re: Estate of D’Agosto, 134 Wn. App. 390, 139 P.3d 1125 (2006). Indus. Indem. Co. of the NW v. Kallevig, 114 Wn.2d 907, 921, 792 P.2d 520 (1990). Keene v. INA, 667 F.2d 1034 (D.C. Cir. 1981)(classic, but optional). Kirk v. Mt. Airy Ins. Co., 134 Wn.2d 558, 951 P.2d 1124 (1998). Lamb-Weston, Inc. v. Oregon Auto. Ins. Co., 219 Or. 110, 341 P.2d 110 (1959), as modified by 219 Or. 110, 346 P.2d 643 (1959) (minority rule) (optional). Leader National v. Torres, 113 Wn.2d 366, 779 P.2d 722 (1989). Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Tripp, 144 Wn.2d 1, 1-19, 25 P.3d 997 (2001). MacDonald v. State Farm, 119 Wn.2d 724 (facts and 733-36 only), 837 P.2d 1000 (1992). Page 10 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 Mahler v. Szucs, 135 Wn.2d 398, 398-421, 957 P.2d 632 (1998). Mission Ins. Co. v. Allendale Mut., 95 Wn.2d 464, 626 P.2d 505 (1981). Mut. of Enumclaw Ins. Co. v. Patrick Archer Constr. Co., 123 Wn. App. 728 (2004). Mut. of Enumclaw v. Dan Paulson Constr., 161 Wn.2d 903, 169 P.3d 1 (2007). New Hampshire Indem. Co. v. Budget Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc., 148 Wn.2d 929, 64 P.3d 1239 (2003). Northern States Power Co. v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York, 523 N.W.2d 657 (Minn. 1994). Prudential Prop & Cas. Co. v. Lawrence, 45 Wn. App. 111, 724 P.2d 418 (1986). Puget Sound Energy v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds, 134 Wn. App. 228, 138 P.3d 1068 (2006) (optional). Queen City Farms v. Central National, 126 Wn.2d 50, 64-72, 75-76 only (1994). R.A. Hanson Co. v. Aetna Ins. Co., 26 Wn. App. 290, 296, 612 P.2d 456 (1980). Rones v. Safeco, 119 Wn.2d 650, 835 P.2d 1036 (1992). Safeco Ins. Co. of Amer. v. Butler, 118 Wn.2d 383, 823 P.2d 499 (1992). St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Onvia, 165 Wn.2d 122, 196 P.3d 664 (2008). State Capital Ins. Co. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 318 N.C. 534, 350 S.E.2d 66 (1986) (including dissents). Tank v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 105 Wn.2d 381, 715 P.2d 1133 (1986). Toll Bridge Auth. v. Aetna Ins. Co., 54 Wn. App. 400, 773 P.2d 906 (1989). Transport Indem. v. Lee Way Motor Freight, 487 F. Supp. 1325 (N.D. Tex. 1980). Truck Ins. Exch. v. BRE Properties, 119 Wn. App. 582, 81 P.3d 929 (2003). Truck Ins. Exch. v. VanPort Homes, Inc., 147 Wn.2d 751 (2002). Twin City Fire Ins. Co. v. Ben Arnold-Sunbelt Beverage Co., 433 F.3d 365 (4th Cir. 2005). Unigard v. Leven, 97 Wn.App. 417, 983 P.2d 1155 (1999). Union Carbide Corp. v. Affiliated FM Insurance Co., 16 N.Y.3d 419, 947 N.E.2d 111, 992 N.Y.S.2d 220, 2011 WL 588470 (NY Ct. App.) (2011). Villella v. Pub. Employees Mut. Ins. Co., 106 Wn.2d 806, 725 P.2d 957 (1986). Walsh Constr. v. Mut. of Enumclaw, 338 Ore. 1, 104 P.3d 1146 (2005) (Optional). Wetmore v. Unigard Ins. Co., 125 Wn.App. 938, 107 P.3d 123 (2005). The Following Cases Are Currently Unassigned (but may be used) Isaacson v. DeMartin Agency, Inc., 77 Wn. App. 875 (1995). Anderson v. Vrahnos, 149 Ill. App. 251, 500 N.E.2d 1986). Statewide Ins. v. Dewar, 143 Ariz. 553, 694 P.2d 1167 (1984). Page 11 of 12 Last updated: March 22, 2012 Statutes and Regulations RCW 19.86.090 RCW 48.01.030 RCW 48.18.010 - .050 RCW 4.22.060 RCW 48.22.005, .085-.100 RCW 48.22.030-.040 RCW 48.27.010-020 RCW 48.30.010 RCW 48.30.015 WAC 284-30-300 to 380 WAC 284-30-500 Articles M. Marick, “Éxcess Insurance: An Overview of General Principles and Current Issues,” 24 Tort & Ins. Law J. 715 (1989). Handouts Handout 1 – “Insurance Intro” (begins with “A Brief History of Insurance”, by Richard S.L. Roddis) Handout 2 – Insurable Interest Rev. 2011 Handout 3 – Measuring Loss Rev. 2011 Handout - Weaver, “Personal Auto Coverages in Washington” (including update) Handout: IFCA for Regulators Handout: Covenant Judgments – TEK KSW Trigger of Coverage Paper Water’s Edge Homeowners Assoc. v. Water’s Edge Assocs., Clark County Cause No. 05-203446-1 (“Ruling on Reasonableness Hearing”, 01/28/2008) (optional) Page 12 of 12