{"id":1224,"date":"2021-10-25T03:50:34","date_gmt":"2021-10-25T03:50:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?page_id=1224"},"modified":"2022-05-05T16:37:17","modified_gmt":"2022-05-05T16:37:17","slug":"caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/","title":{"rendered":"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-kum8a7jj-0a81521116222086d74f0361ce2caa24\">\n#top .av-special-heading.av-kum8a7jj-0a81521116222086d74f0361ce2caa24{\npadding-bottom:10px;\n}\nbody .av-special-heading.av-kum8a7jj-0a81521116222086d74f0361ce2caa24 .av-special-heading-tag .heading-char{\nfont-size:25px;\n}\n.av-special-heading.av-kum8a7jj-0a81521116222086d74f0361ce2caa24 .av-subheading{\nfont-size:15px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='av-special-heading av-kum8a7jj-0a81521116222086d74f0361ce2caa24 av-special-heading-h1 blockquote modern-quote  avia-builder-el-0  el_before_av_hr  avia-builder-el-first '><h1 class='av-special-heading-tag '  itemprop=\"headline\"  >CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements<\/h1><div class='av-subheading av-subheading_below'><p>California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"special-heading-border\"><div class=\"special-heading-inner-border\"><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-1  el_after_av_heading  el_before_avia_sc_search '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7\">\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchform_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nborder-color:#edae44;\nbackground-color:#edae44;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #s.av-input-field{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 #searchsubmit{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n#top .avia_search_element.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7 .av_searchsubmit_wrapper{\nborder-radius:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n.ajax_search_response.av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7{\npadding:0px 0px 0px 0px;\nmargin:0px 0px 0px 0px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<div  class='avia_search_element av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7  avia-builder-el-2  el_after_av_hr  el_before_av_textblock '><search><form action='https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/' id='searchform_element' method='get' class='' data-element_id='av-avia_sc_search-f7f83518637509acfac1c9900b84c1e7' ><div class='av_searchform_wrapper'><input type='search' value='' id='s' name='s' placeholder='Search CACI' aria-label='Search CACI' class='av-input-field ' required \/><div class='av_searchsubmit_wrapper '><input type='submit' value='Find' id='searchsubmit' class='button ' title='View results on search page' aria-label='View results on search page' \/><\/div><input type='hidden' name='numberposts' value='8' \/><input type='hidden' name='post_type' value='page' \/><input type='hidden' name='results_hide_fields' value='post_titles,meta,image' \/><\/div><\/form><\/search><\/div>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-av_textblock-e878f05c31dff72941bf1e49a00d9ff5 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/\">CACI Jury Instructions Index<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/caci-fillable-forms.crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">App: CACI Jury Instructions Fillable Forms Word Format<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-av_hr-91d7ccd583a503147498e120fee2ff9b hr-default  avia-builder-el-4  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-kum8blm1-3f1dcc6cc3db530d2bbd48fb6b5cb107\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-kum8blm1-3f1dcc6cc3db530d2bbd48fb6b5cb107 .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:20px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-kum8blm1-3f1dcc6cc3db530d2bbd48fb6b5cb107 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><h2 class=\"SS_Banner\">2334\u00a0Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements<\/h2>\n<hr \/>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">[<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] claims that [he\/she\/<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">nonbinary pronoun<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">\/it] was harmed by [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s breach of the obligation of good faith and fair dealing because [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] failed to accept a reasonable settlement demand in a lawsuit against [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]. To establish this claim, [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] must prove all of the following:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">1.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff in underlying case<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] brought a lawsuit against [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] for a claim that was covered by [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s insurance policy;<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">2.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] failed to accept a reasonable settlement demand for an amount within policy limits; and<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">3.<\/span><\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">That a monetary judgment was entered against [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] for a sum greater than the policy limits.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">\u201cPolicy limits\u201d means the highest amount available under the policy for the claim against [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">].<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">A settlement demand for an amount within policy limits is reasonable if [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of defendant<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">] knew or should have known at the time the demand was rejected that the potential judgment was likely to exceed the amount of the demand based on [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff in underlying case<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s injuries or loss and [<\/span><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">name of plaintiff<\/span><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">]\u2019s probable liability. However, the demand may be unreasonable for reasons other than the amount demanded. <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\"><\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_1\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">New September 2003; Revised December 2007, June 2012, December 2012, June 2016 <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">Crowdsource Lawyers<\/a><\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\">https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci<\/a><span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\"><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/span><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Directions for Use<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_2\">\n<p>This instruction is for use in an \u201cexcess judgment\u201d case; that is one in which judgment was against the insured for an amount over the policy limits, after the insurer rejected a settlement demand within policy limits.<\/p>\n<p>The instructions in this series assume that the plaintiff is the insured and the defendant is the insurer. The party designations may be changed if appropriate to the facts of the case.<\/p>\n<p>For instructions regarding general breach of contract issues, refer to the Contracts series (CACI No. 300\u00a0et seq.).<\/p>\n<p>If it is alleged that a demand was made in excess of limits and there is a claim that the defendant should have contributed the policy limits, then this instruction will need to be modified.<\/p>\n<p>This instruction should also be modified if the insurer did not accept the policy-limits demand because of potential remaining exposure to the insured, such as a contractual indemnity claim or exposure to other claimants.<\/p>\n<p>Under this instruction, if the jury finds that the policy-limits demand was reasonable, then the insurer is automatically liable for the entire excess judgment. Language from the California Supreme Court supports this view of what might be called insurer \u201cstrict liability\u201d if the demand is reasonable. (See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Johansen v. California State Auto. Assn. Inter-Insurance Bureau<\/span>\u00a0(1975) 15 Cal.3d 9, 16 [123 Cal.Rptr. 288, 538 P.2d 744]\u00a0[\u201c[W]henever it is likely that the judgment against the insured will exceed policy limits \u2018so that the most reasonable manner of disposing of the claim is a settlement which can be made within those limits, a consideration in good faith of the insured\u2019s interest\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">requires the insurer to settle<\/span>\u00a0the claim,\u2019\u2009\u201d italics added].)<\/p>\n<p>However, there is language in numerous cases, including several from the California Supreme Court, that would require the plaintiff to also prove that the insurer\u2019s rejection of the demand was \u201cunreasonable.\u201d (See, e.g.,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Hamilton v. Maryland Cas. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2002) 27 Cal.4th 718, 724\u2013725 [117 Cal.Rptr.2d 318, 41 P.3d 128]\u00a0[\u201cAn\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">unreasonable<\/span>\u00a0refusal to settle may subject the insurer to liability for the entire amount of the judgment rendered against the insured, including any portion in excess of the policy limits,\u201d italics added];\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Graciano v. Mercury General Corp.<\/span>\u00a0(2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 414, 425 [179 Cal.Rptr.3d 717]\u00a0[claim for bad faith based on an alleged wrongful refusal to settle\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">also<\/span>\u00a0requires proof the insurer\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">unreasonably<\/span>\u00a0failed to accept an otherwise reasonable offer within the time specified by the third party for acceptance, italics added].) Under this view, even if the policy-limits demand was reasonable, the insurer may assert that it had a legitimate reason for rejecting it. However, this option, if it exists, is not available in a denial of coverage case. (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Johansen, supra<\/span>, 15 Cal.3d at pp. 15\u221216.)<\/p>\n<p>None of these cases, however, neither those seemingly creating strict liability nor those seemingly providing an opportunity for the insurer to assert that its rejection was reasonable, actually discuss, analyze, and apply this standard to reach a result. All are determined on other issues, leaving the pertinent language as arguably dicta.<\/p>\n<p>For this reason, the committee has elected not to change the elements of the instruction at this time. Hopefully, someday there will be a definitive resolution from the courts. Until then, the need for an additional element requiring the insurer\u2019s rejection of the demand to have been unreasonable is a plausible, but unsettled, requirement. For a thorough analysis of the issue, see the committee\u2019s report to the Judicial Council for its June 2016 meeting, found at\u00a0https:\/\/jcc.legistar.com\/View.ashx?M=F&amp;ID=4496094&amp;GUID=53DBD55C-AF07-498F-B665-D6BDD6DEFB28. <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<h2 class=\"SS_HideShowSection SS_Expandable\">Sources and Authority<\/h2>\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\">\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[T]he implied obligation of good faith and fair dealing requires the insurer to settle in an appropriate case although the express terms of the policy do not impose such a duty. [\u00b6] The insurer, in deciding whether a claim should be compromised, must take into account the interest of the insured and give it at least as much consideration as it does to its own interest. When there is great risk of a recovery beyond the policy limits so that the most reasonable manner of disposing of the claim is a settlement which can be made within those limits, a consideration in good faith of the insured\u2019s interest requires the insurer to settle the claim.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Comunale v. Traders &amp; General Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1958) 50 Cal.2d 654, 659 [328 P.2d 198], citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cLiability is imposed not for a bad faith breach of the contract but for failure to meet the duty to accept reasonable settlements, a duty included within the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Crisci v. Security Insurance Co. of New Haven, Connecticut<\/span>\u00a0(1967) 66 Cal.2d 425, 430 [58 Cal.Rptr. 13, 426 P.2d 173].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cIn determining whether an insurer has given consideration to the interests of the insured, the test is whether a prudent insurer without policy limits would have accepted the settlement offer.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Crisci<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 66 Cal.2d at p. 429.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[I]n deciding whether or not to compromise the claim, the insurer must conduct itself as though it alone were liable for the entire amount of the judgment.\u2009\u2026\u2009[T]he only permissible consideration in evaluating the reasonableness of the settlement offer becomes whether, in light of the victim\u2019s injuries and the probable liability of the insured, the ultimate judgment is likely to exceed the amount of the settlement offer.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Johansen, supra,<\/span>\u00a015 Cal.3d at p. 16, internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[A]n insurer is required to act in good faith in dealing with its insured. Thus, in deciding whether or not to settle a claim, the insurer must take into account the interests of the insured, and when there is a great risk of recovery beyond the policy limits, a good faith consideration of the insured\u2019s interests may require the insurer to settle the claim within the policy limits. An unreasonable refusal to settle may subject the insurer to liability for the entire amount of the judgment rendered against the insured, including any portion in excess of the policy limits.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Hamilton, supra<\/span>, 27 Cal.4th at pp. 724\u2212725.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe size of the judgment recovered in the personal injury action when it exceeds the policy limits, although not conclusive, furnishes an inference that the value of the claim is the equivalent of the amount of the judgment and that acceptance of an offer within those limits was the most reasonable method of dealing with the claim.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Crisci<\/span>,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">supra<\/span>, 66 Cal.2d at p. 431.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe covenant of good faith and fair dealing implied in every insurance policy obligates the insurer, among other things, to accept a reasonable offer to settle a lawsuit by a third party against the insured within policy limits whenever there is a substantial likelihood of a recovery in excess of those limits. The insurer must evaluate the reasonableness of an offer to settle a lawsuit against the insured by considering the probable liability of the insured and the amount of that liability, without regard to any coverage defenses. An insurer that fails to accept a reasonable settlement offer within policy limits will be held liable in tort for the entire judgment against the insured, even if that amount exceeds the policy limits. An insurer\u2019s duty to accept a reasonable settlement offer in these circumstances is implied in law to protect the insured from exposure to liability in excess of coverage as a result of the insurer\u2019s gamble\u2014on which only the insured might lose.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Rappaport-Scott v. Interinsurance Exch. of the Auto. Club<\/span>\u00a0(2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 831, 836 [53 Cal.Rptr.3d 245], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAn insured\u2019s claim for bad faith based on an alleged wrongful refusal to settle first requires proof the third party made a reasonable offer to settle the claims against the insured for an amount within the policy limits. The offer satisfies this first element if (1) its terms are clear enough to have created an enforceable contract resolving all claims had it been accepted by the insurer, (2) all of the third party claimants have joined in the demand, (3) it provides for a complete release of all insureds, and (4) the time provided for acceptance did not deprive the insurer of an adequate opportunity to investigate and evaluate its insured\u2019s exposure.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Graciano, supra<\/span>, 231 Cal.App.4th at p. 425, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA bad faith claim requires \u2018something beyond breach of the contractual duty itself, and that something more is \u2018\u2009\u201crefusing,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">without proper cause<\/span>, to compensate its insured for a loss covered by the policy\u2009\u2026\u2009.\u201d [Citation.] Of course, the converse of \u201cwithout proper cause\u201d is that declining to perform a contractual duty under the policy\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">with proper cause<\/span>\u00a0is not a breach of the implied covenant.\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Graciano, supra<\/span>, 231 Cal.App.4th at p. 433, original italics.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cDetermination of the reasonableness of a settlement offer for purposes of a reimbursement action is based on the information available to [the insurer] at the time of the proposed settlement.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Isaacson v. California Ins. Guarantee Assn.<\/span>\u00a0(1988) 44 Cal.3d 775, 793 [244 Cal.Rptr. 655, 750 P.2d 297].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cThe third party is entitled to set a reasonable time limit within which the insurer must accept the settlement proposal\u2009\u2026\u2009.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Graciano, supra<\/span>, 231 Cal.App.4th at p. 434.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cWhether [the insurer] \u2018refused\u2019 the \u2018offer,\u2019 and whether it could reasonably have acted otherwise in light of the 11-day deadline imposed by the offer\u2019s terms, were questions for the jury.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Coe v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1977) 66 Cal.App.3d 981, 994 [136 Cal.Rptr. 331].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA cause of action for bad faith refusal to settle arises only after a judgment has been rendered in excess of the policy limits.\u2009\u2026 Until judgment is actually entered, the mere possibility or probability of an excess judgment does not render the refusal to settle actionable.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Superior Court<\/span>\u00a0(1999) 71 Cal.App.4th 782, 788 [84 Cal.Rptr.2d 43], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAn insurer\u2019s wrongful failure to settle may be actionable even without rendition of an excess judgment. An insured may recover for bad faith failure to settle, despite the lack of an excess judgment, where the insurer\u2019s misconduct goes beyond a simple failure to settle within policy limits or the insured suffers consequential damages apart from an excess judgment.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Howard v. American National Fire Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 498, 527 [115 Cal.Rptr.3d 42], internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c\u2009\u2018An insurer who denies coverage\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">does so at its own risk and although its position may not have been entirely groundless<\/span>, if the denial is found to be wrongful it is liable for the full amount which will compensate the insured for all the detriment caused by the insurer\u2019s breach of the express and implied obligations of the contract.\u2019 Accordingly, contrary to the defendant\u2019s suggestion, an insurer\u2019s \u2018good faith,\u2019 though erroneous, belief in noncoverage affords no defense to liability flowing from the insurer\u2019s refusal to accept a reasonable settlement offer.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Johansen, supra<\/span>, 15 Cal.3d at pp. 15\u221216, original italics, footnotes and internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[W]here the\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">kind<\/span>\u00a0of claim asserted is not covered by the insurance contract (and not simply the\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">amount<\/span>\u00a0of the claim), an insurer has no obligation to pay money in settlement of a noncovered claim, because \u2018The insurer does not \u2026 insure the entire range of an insured\u2019s well-being, outside the scope of and unrelated to the insurance policy, with respect to paying third party claims.\u2009\u2026\u2019\u2009\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Dewitt v. Monterey Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 233, 244 [138 Cal.Rptr.3d 705], original italics.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cA good faith belief in noncoverage is not relevant to a determination of the reasonableness of a settlement offer.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Samson v. Transamerica Insurance Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1981) 30 Cal.3d 220, 243 [178 Cal.Rptr. 343, 636 P.2d 32], internal citation omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cAn insurer that breaches its duty of reasonable settlement is liable for all the insured\u2019s damages proximately caused by the breach, regardless of policy limits. Where the underlying action has proceeded to trial and a judgment in excess of the policy limits has been entered against the insured, the insurer is ordinarily liable to its insured for the entire amount of that judgment, excluding any punitive damages awarded.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Hamilton, supra<\/span>, 27 Cal.4th at p. 725, internal citations omitted.)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c[I]nsurers do have a \u2018selfish\u2019 interest (that is, one that is peculiar to themselves) in imposing a blanket rule which effectively precludes disclosure of policy limits, and that interest can adversely affect the possibility that an excess claim against a policyholder might be settled within policy limits. Thus, a palpable conflict of interest exists in at least one context where there is no formal settlement offer. We therefore conclude that a formal settlement offer is not an absolute prerequisite to a bad faith action in the wake of an excess verdict when the claimant makes a request for policy limits and the insurer refuses to contact the policyholder about the request.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Boicourt v. Amex Assurance Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1390, 1398\u20131399 [93 Cal.Rptr.3d 763].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201cFor bad faith liability to attach to an insurer\u2019s failure to pursue settlement discussions, in a case where the insured is exposed to a judgment beyond policy limits, there must be, at a minimum, some evidence either that the injured party has communicated to the insurer an interest in settlement, or some other circumstance demonstrating the insurer knew that settlement within policy limits could feasibly be negotiated. In the absence of such evidence, or evidence the insurer by its conduct has actively foreclosed the possibility of settlement, there is no \u201copportunity to settle\u201d that an insurer may be taxed with ignoring.\u201d (<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Reid v. Mercury Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 262, 272 [162 Cal.Rptr.3d 894].)<\/span><\/p>\n<p><span class=\"SS_ListLabel\">\u2022<\/span><span class=\"SS_ListItemContent\">\u201c<span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">(4) [12:245] Insurer culpability required? A number of cases suggest that some degree of insurer \u2018culpability\u2019 is required before an insurer\u2019s refusal to settle a third party claim can be found to constitute \u2018bad faith.\u2019 [<span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Howard v. American Nat\u2019l Fire Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(2010) 187 CA4th 498, 529, 115 CR3d 42, 69\u00a0(quoting text)]<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p>(a) [12:246]\u00a0<span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">Good faith or mistake as excuse:<\/span>\u00a0\u2018If the insurer has exercised good faith in all of its dealings \u2026 and if the settlement which it has rejected has been fully and fairly considered and has been based upon an\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">honest belief<\/span>\u00a0that the insurer could defeat the action or keep any possible judgment within the limits of the policy, and its judgments are based on a fair review of the evidence after reasonable diligence in ascertaining the facts, and upon sound legal advice, a court should not subject the insurer to further liability if it ultimately turns out that its judgment is a mistaken judgment.\u2019 [See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Brown v. Guarantee Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1957) 155 CA2d 679, 684, 319 P2d 69, 72\u00a0(emphasis added);\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Howard v. American Nat\u2019l Fire Ins. Co.,\u00a0<\/span>supra, 187 CA4th at 529, 115 CR3d at 69\u2014\u2018an insurer may reasonably underestimate the value of a case, and thus refuse settlement\u2019 on this basis (acknowledging but not applying rule)]<\/p>\n<p>\u2018In short, so long as insurers are not subject to a strict liability standard, there is still room for an honest, innocent mistake.\u2019 [<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Walbrook Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.<\/span>\u00a0(1992) 5 CA4th 1445, 1460, 7 CR2d 513, 521]<\/p>\n<p>1) [12:246.1]\u00a0<span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\">Comment: These cases are difficult to reconcile with the \u2018only permissible consideration\u2019 standard of a \u2018reasonable settlement demand\u2019 set out in\u00a0<span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Johansen<\/span>\u00a0and\u00a0CACI 2334\u00a0(see \u00b6\u200912:235.1). A possible explanation is that these cases address the \u2018reasonableness\u2019 of the insurer\u2019s refusal to settle based on a dispute as to the value of the case (or other matters unrelated to coverage), whereas\u00a0<span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Johansen<\/span>\u00a0addressed \u2018reasonableness\u2019 in the context of a coverage dispute (see \u00b6\u200912:235). [See\u00a0<span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Howard v. American Nat\u2019l Fire Ins. Co., supra, 187 CA4th at 529, 115 CR3d at 69\u00a0(quoting text)]\u201d<\/span><\/span>\u00a0(Croskey et al., California Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation, Ch. 12B-B,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bad Faith Refusal To Settle<\/span>, \u00b6\u00b6\u200912:245\u201312:246.1 (The Rutter Group), bold in original.) <br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><br class=\"avia-permanent-lb\" \/><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2 class=\"SS_Heading\"><span class=\"SS_bf\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_bf\"><span class=\"SS_ib\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_ib\">Secondary Sources<\/span><\/span><\/h2>\n<div>2 Witkin, Summary of California Law (11th ed. 2017) Insurance, \u00a7\u00a7\u2009366\u2013368<\/div>\n<div>Croskey et al., California Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation, Ch. 12B-A,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Implied Covenant Liability\u2014Introduction<\/span>, \u00b6\u00b6\u200912:202\u201312:224 (The Rutter Group)<\/div>\n<div>Croskey et al., California Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation, Ch. 12B-B,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bad Faith Refusal To Settle<\/span>, \u00b6\u00b6\u200912:226\u201312:548 (The Rutter Group)<\/div>\n<div>Croskey et al., California Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation, Ch. 12B-C,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Bad Faith Liability Despite Settlement Of Third Party Claims<\/span>, \u00b6\u00b6\u200912:575\u201312:581.12 (The Rutter Group)<\/div>\n<div>Croskey et al., California Practice Guide: Insurance Litigation, Ch. 12B-D,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Refusal To Defend Cases<\/span>, \u00b6\u00b6\u200912:582\u201312:686, (The Rutter Group)<\/div>\n<div>2 California Liability Insurance Practice: Claims and Litigation (Cont.Ed.Bar) Actions for Failure to Settle, \u00a7\u00a7\u200926.1\u201326.35<\/div>\n<div>2\u00a0California Insurance Law and Practice, Ch. 13,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Claims Handling and the Duty of Good Faith<\/span>, \u00a7\u200913.07[1]\u2013[3]\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>26\u00a0California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 308,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Insurance<\/span>, \u00a7\u2009308.24\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div>12\u00a0California Points and Authorities, Ch. 120,\u00a0<span class=\"SS_it\" data-housestyle=\"EMPHASIS_it\">Insurance<\/span>, \u00a7\u00a7\u2009120.195,\u00a0120.199,\u00a0120.205,\u00a0120.207\u00a0(Matthew Bender)<\/div>\n<div class=\"SS_Note\">\n<div id=\"TRNotes_n_3\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/section>\n<div  class='hr av-7y73fs-0bf156579dd6fb56efdfcc1292337bf6 hr-default  avia-builder-el-6  el_after_av_textblock  el_before_av_textblock '><span class='hr-inner '><span class=\"hr-inner-style\"><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n\n<style type=\"text\/css\" data-created_by=\"avia_inline_auto\" id=\"style-css-av-5bz18o-d847bcb2ea9f277ac8d986e874e11cf0\">\n#top .av_textblock_section.av-5bz18o-d847bcb2ea9f277ac8d986e874e11cf0 .avia_textblock{\nfont-size:22px;\n}\n<\/style>\n<section  class='av_textblock_section av-5bz18o-d847bcb2ea9f277ac8d986e874e11cf0 '   itemscope=\"itemscope\" itemtype=\"https:\/\/schema.org\/CreativeWork\" ><div class='avia_textblock'  itemprop=\"text\" ><p><a href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/\">CrowdSourceLawyers.com<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div><\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1224","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-05-05T16:37:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"15 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\\\/\",\"name\":\"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2021-10-25T03:50:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-05-05T16:37:17+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/home\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"name\":\"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI\",\"description\":\"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/2\\\/2021\\\/09\\\/CrowdSource-Logo.png\",\"width\":453,\"height\":208,\"caption\":\"CrowdSource Lawyers\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\\\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","og_url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/","og_site_name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","article_modified_time":"2022-05-05T16:37:17+00:00","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"15 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/","name":"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements - Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website"},"datePublished":"2021-10-25T03:50:34+00:00","dateModified":"2022-05-05T16:37:17+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/caci-2334-bad-faith-third-party-refusal-to-accept-reasonable-settlement-within-liability-policy-limits-essential-factual-elements\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/home\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CACI 2334 Bad Faith (Third Party)\u2014Refusal to Accept Reasonable Settlement Within Liability Policy Limits\u2014Essential Factual Elements"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#website","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","name":"Judicial Council California Civil Jury Instructions CACI","description":"California Civil Jury Instructions CACI site","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#organization","name":"CrowdSource Lawyers","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/2\/2021\/09\/CrowdSource-Logo.png","width":453,"height":208,"caption":"CrowdSource Lawyers"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1224","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1224"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1224\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3706,"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1224\/revisions\/3706"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/crowdsourcelawyers.com\/judicial-council-california-civil-jury-instructions-caci\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1224"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}