Source: https://www.uphelp.org/resources/amicus-briefs?page=7
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 20:59:12+00:00

Document:
The Amicus Project provides judges with a balanced perspective when they review cases involving insurance questions. Amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs are the vehicle through which interested parties other than the parties in a case make points for reviewing judges to consider. Judicial decisions define insurance consumers' rights and insurance companies' obligations, so they are critically important and have long-lasting impact. Insurers and their trade associations routinely deluge reviewing courts with briefs arguing their views. In the majority of cases, judges get no briefs at all that advance the perspective of insureds/insurance consumers. Predictably, the results often favor the insurance industry. UP is striving to change this imbalance through our Amicus Project.
Welcome to the Amicus Project library. Here you will find copies of the 400+ legal briefs United Policyholders has filed as an "amicus curiae" (friend of the court) since 1991. We file amicus briefs to help courts respect and effectuate consumers' reasonable expectations of coverage and reach fair results in coverage and claim dispute lawsuits. In addition to calling courts' attention to helpful legal precedents, UP helps judges consider the impact of their decisions on people and businesses that suffer dire consequences when insurance companies put their own profit motives ahead of their customers' best interests.
The United Policyholders Amicus Project is made possible by the hundreds of dedicated policyholder attorneys who generously volunteer their time to write, review and edit our briefs. Click here to view the attorneys who make up our Amicus Project Team.
To request that UP weigh in on a case, please complete this Request Form.
UP chronicled our Amicus Project in a 2011 report titled "Twenty Years Protecting, Defending and Advancing Policyholders Rights"
Stephen Rumnock v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co.
R.T. Vanderbilt Co. v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.
Arceneaux et al v. Amstar et al.
Monarch et al v. National Union Fire Ins. Co.
Maplewood Partners v. Indian Harbor Ins. Co.
The District Court set a dangerous precedent in regards to the discovery and use of documents protected by the attorney-client privilege and work product immunity in insurance coverage cases.
St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. American Bank Holdings, Inc.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.