Summary

Andree Layton Roaf Parker v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co… (1996)

Farm Bureau resisted discovery of the notices to its insureds as not relevant, and violative of the privacy rights of its policy holders. The trial court found that Parker had discovered how and why Farm Bureau billed some insureds differently from others, and thus the additional relevancy of the notices had not been shown. Parker argues that the trial court abused its discretion in denying him the right to inspect and copy these notices.
Source: Wikisource

Andree Layton Roaf Parker v. Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co… (1996)

Farm Bureau expresses policy concerns that other attorneys will bring frivolous bad-faith claims in coverage cases in order to recover a larger fee. Parker replies that because this was a relatively small claim, the conduct of Farm Bureau was especially egregious, and that the larger fee should be upheld in order to encourage competent attorneys to take on such small cases.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature