In This Issue:

- Western District Of Washington: Denial of a Defense Where Additional-Insured Status Was Arguable, and Doing So in Reliance on Extrinsic Evidence, Were Both Acts of Bad Faith

- New York Court Rules That Documents Created After Suit Filed Are Not Categorically “Off Limits” in Discovery

- Western District of Washington: No Attorney-Client Privilege for Communications with In-House Counsel When the Only Claim is Bad Faith

- Florida Appellate Court Holds an Insured Must Obtain a Favorable Resolution in the Underlying Litigation for Benefits Prior to Bringing a Bad Faith Action

- Excerpt from Western District Of Washington: No Attorney-Client Privilege for Communications with In-House Counsel When the Only Claim is Bad Faith:

Plaintiff Tim Ryan Construction (“TRC”) was an additional insured under defendant Burlington Insurance Company’s (“Burlington”) insurance policy issued for TRC’s subcontractor Sound Glass Sales, Inc. (“Sound Glass”). In the underlying lawsuit, it was alleged that general contractor TRG was liable for a construction defect caused by several subcontractors, including Sound Glass. TRC tendered the underlying complaint to Burlington. Burlington denied coverage and TRC followed with the present lawsuit alleging, inter alia, bad faith due to Burlington’s coverage denial.