News & Insights

Recent Posts

Covid-19: Assessing the Legal Risk of Infectious Diseases

WSHB Employer Alert: FFCRA and DOL Regulations 4.2.20

Employment Practices Consultation & COVID-19

It’s a No-Win Situation: The Perils Facing Hospitals Due to the Coronavirus

COVID-19 Employer Alert: Summary of the CARES Act

COVID-19: New York Malpractice Law Alert

COVID-19 Employer Alert: Enactment of Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA)

WSHB Co-Founder Stephen Henning to Announce the Winner of CLM's 2020 Outside Counsel Professional of the Year Award

WSHB Partner Robert Hellner Shares Mediation Tactics at CLM’s 2020 Annual Conference

Risk Transfer and Contractual Indemnification – Who Gets Left Holding the Bag?

New Developments in Challenging Certificates of Merit — Seeking Dismissal for Failure to Concurrently File Certificate with the Original Petition

Seven Habits that Define a Highly Effective Claims Team

Social Media Do's and Don'ts

Read the Room: Arguments that Work in Court but May Backfire at Mediation

WSHB Partner Kelly Waters Named to NJBIZ's 2020 Best Fifty Women in Business List

WSHB Names Andrew S. Kessler as Managing Partner of the Firm's Philadelphia Office

WSHB Employment Alert: California Law Banning Arbitration Agreements Temporarily on Hold

Sam McDermott on the Dos and Don’ts of Construction Project Termination

Full Disclosure! Insurer Beware: Colorado’s New Automobile Policy Disclosure Law Has Teeth!

Andrew S. Kessler Named Legal Counsel for Northeast Community Center for Behavioral Health

WSHB Elevates Ten Partners to Defined Equity Status

Eleven WSHB Attorneys Elected Into Partnership

Eighteen Attorneys Elected to WSHB Senior Counsel

Supreme Court Allows Suit Over Website Accessibility

Strategies for Defending Legionella and Mold Claims

Residential Revolution

Time Limit Demand Issues Arrive in North Carolina

WSHB Welcomes New Partner Julie A. Weerth to the Firm's New York Office

Temp Agency Absolved of Liability in Hotly Contested Action

Alternative Fee Agreements and Construction Issues: Oil and Water or Perfect Pairing!?

WSHB's Graham Miller Helps Demystify Construction Claims in the Pacific Northwest

WSHB Partner Janice Michaels Named to The Best Lawyers in America© 2020 List

One Bad Apple: Navigating through Sexual Battery and other Intentional Torts

Leading Construction Litigator Cynthia Tari Joins WSHB's Dallas Office

WSHB’s Philadelphia Partner Secures Summary Judgment in Catastrophic Premises Liability Matter

WSHB Welcomes New Partner Andrew Kessler

New Bill In New York Proposed for Signature by Governor Andrew Cuomo is Set To Make Employers "SWEAT"

Renowned Litigator Jason Williams Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Litigator Richard Young Joins WSHB's Nevada Office

Published Appellate Opinion Upholding Summary Judgment in Favor of Commercial Tenant Against $3.5M Subrogation Suit

17 WSHB Lawyers Honored as 2019's Rising Stars

Arizona Supreme Court Allows Court of Appeals Decision Expanding Defendants' Ability to Enforce Settlements to Stand

WSHB’s Jason Klein Breaks Down the Good, the Sad and the Funny Sides of Claims

Litigating Sexual Battery and Other Intentional Torts: Navigating the One Bad Apple in Medical Negligence

WSHB Partner Michelle Arbitrio to Moderate Panel on Insurance and Risk Management in the Age of Mass Shootings

Girl on Fire: The Price of Pursuing the Truth in the #MeToo World

Pragmatic Issues on Settlement Versus Trial for Legal Malpractice Cases

WSHB Partner Jade Tran Named to Lawyers of Color's "Nation's Best" List

A Withering Assault

The Natural Progression of Natural Disasters

Nevada’s Governor Signs Chapter 40 Reform Bill

WA Condo Law Changes Hope to Curtail Frivolous Defect Lawsuits and Stimulate Production

WSHB Co-Founder Stephen Henning Steps Into the Spotlight at this Year's West Coast Casualty Seminar

Professional Liability Expert Weighs In On Protecting Your Practice From Opioid Doc Arrest Fallout

Penalties, Punitives, and Granny Cams: The Escalating Lure of Elder Abuse Litigation

Are Structured Settlements Still Relevant

Game Changing Trends Affecting Construction

He's Not My Guy: The Joint-Employer Doctrine

WSHB Case Update: DOL Proposes Increase to Minimum Salary Threshold

WSHB and DWF Announce Exclusive Association

WSHB Nevada Client Alert - New Legislation Providing Immunity to Certain Businesses from Covid Personal Injury and Wrongful Death Claims

First Cybersecurity Enforcement Action Filed by the New York State Department of Financial Services

Covid-19 Liability Risk: Can It Be Waived?

Colorado Imposes New Limits on Insurers Seeking to Assert a Failure-to-Cooperate Defense

Colorado Imposes New Limits on Insurers Seeking to Assert a Failure-to-Cooperate Defense

July 23, 2020

Insurers investigating claims in Colorado should be aware of new limits on their ability to assert a failure-to-cooperate defense in litigation. Effective September 15, 2020, C.R.S. § 10-3-1118 imposes a number of hurdles on insurers seeking to argue that coverage is not available because an insured did not cooperate in the investigation of a claim.

Before an insurer can assert a failure-to-cooperate defense in first-party actions, the statute requires compliance with several conditions. First, the insurer must request information from the insured or their representative in writing, via certified mail or electronic means, if the insured or their representative have consented to receive electronic documents from the insurer.

Second, the requested information must not be available to the insurer without the assistance of the insured.

Third, the insured must be given 60 days to respond to the request for information.

Fourth, the information requested must be information that a “reasonable person” would determine the insurer needs to adjust the claim or prevent fraud.

Finally, the insured must be given an opportunity to cure any alleged non-cooperation. This opportunity must include written notice within 60 days to the insured detailing with particularity the alleged failure to cooperate, and 60 days after receipt of the notice for the insured to cure.

Even if an insurer complies with all of these conditions precedent, the new statute limits a failure-to-cooperate defense to the portion of the claim where the insurer’s ability to evaluate or pay was “materially and substantially prejudiced” by the insured’s non-cooperation.

In a small bit of good news for insurers, the statute prevents insureds from bringing common law or statutory bad faith claims because insurers gave them only the statutorily required periods to respond to a request for information or cure a failure to cooperate.

The language and procedures set out in the statute necessarily invite questions that may arise under any number of circumstances, including how to comply with the statute without adversely affecting a potential failure-to-cooperate defense. The experienced team of attorneys at Wood, Smith, Henning & Berman LLP are available to assist insurers with navigating the complexities of these new requirements.

PRINT

Privacy Policy      |      Site Map

© 2020 Wood Smith Henning & Berman LLP

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required