Eversheds Sutherland 11th Circuit Business Blog
content top

A Policy-Limits Demand Under Georgia Law May Require Timely Payment as a Condition of Settlement

In Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Woodard, 2017 WL 2819729 (11th Cir. June 30, 2017), the Eleventh Circuit applied the Georgia Supreme Court’s holding in Grange Mutual Casualty Co. v. Woodard, 797 S.E.2d 814 (Ga. 2017), to hold that an insurer’s failure to deliver payment within the time required by a policy-limits demand meant that there was no binding settlement between the parties....

Deference on All Fronts to Government Settling Qui Tam Action

Deference runs throughout a decision published last week, United States v. Everglades College, Inc., 2017 WL 1658478 (11th Cir. May 3, 2017), where the court issued four holdings in connection with the government’s settlement of a False Claims Act qui tam action relating to federal financial aid funds under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965. The court actually consolidated...

Insurer Not Bound by Settlement That Insured Negotiated in Bad Faith

Under Florida law, a settlement may not be enforced against an insurer where its insured did not negotiate in good faith, thus failing to adequately represent the interests of the party that would ultimately have to pay the settlement. The Eleventh Circuit, in an opinion published November 17, 2016, Sidman v. Travelers Casualty & Surety, 2016 WL 6803034, affirmed the district...

When a Settlement Contingent on Vacatur is Grounds for Rule 60(b) Relief from Judgment

On July 12, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of a Rule 60(b) motion in Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Crum & Forster Specialty Insurance Co., 2016 WL 3741972 (11th Cir. July 12, 2016), and vacated the underlying summary judgment orders that the parties had jointly sought relief from in the motion.  The parties based their motion for relief from...

Next Entries »