Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)

Citation: Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)
Parent Document: Dorfman v. Smith, 342 Conn. 582 (2022)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2022-03-29
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/10278647/dorfman-v-smith/ ↗

Full Text

2,529 chars

policies underlying the litigation privilege should apply
to insurance companies defending first-party claims. In
any event, the parties have not given us a word of
briefing on the issue, and the facts of the case provide
us with an extremely poor framework within which to
decide the issue. Indeed, the majority appears to agree
that, in the appropriate, future case, we could decide,
like the court in Barefield, that the balancing of public
policy interests clearly weighs in favor of allowing prop-
erly pleaded CUTPA claims based on systemic abusive
litigation tactics by insurance companies in furtherance
of an unfair claim settlement practice. As I explained
in part II of this opinion, it is well established that
insurance contracts impose, at the very least, a duty of
good faith and fair dealing running from an insurer
to its insured, and several courts have held that that
obligation continues during and within the litigation
process. When the proper case arises, we should seri-
ously consider the possibility that systemic imbalances
between insurers and insureds make it tempting and
profitable for insurance companies to violate this obli-
gation of good faith as a general business practice. See
J. Ellison & T. Law, ‘‘Bad Faith and Punitive Damages:
The Policyholder’s Guide to Bad Faith Insurance Cover-
age Litigation—Understanding the Available Recovery
Tools,’’ American Law Institute—American Bar Associ-
ation Continuing Legal Education, Westlaw No. SK095
ALI-ABA *251, *259–72 (June 16, 2005) (discussing sys-
temic imbalances between insureds and insurers). As
one court has observed, ‘‘[i]nsurance is different. Once
an insured files a claim, the insurer has a strong incen-
tive to conserve its financial resources balanced against
the effect on its reputation of a hard-ball approach.
Insurance contracts are also unique in another respect.
Unlike other contracts, the insured has no ability to
cover if the insurer refuses without justification to pay
a claim. Insurance contracts are like many other con-
tracts in that one party (the insured) renders perfor-
Page 118 CONNECTICUT LAW JOURNAL March 29, 2022

Other Sections in This Document (164)

Full Text