Insurance Regulation
We have served for over three decades as special counsel to all five elected California Insurance Commissioners, whom we have represented and advised on the implementation of Proposition 103 (the insurance‑reform initiative passed by the voters in 1988); on enforcement of the Unfair Insurance Practices Act; and on title-insurance regulation. The firm has advised and represented insurance regulators in Washington, Missouri, Texas, and New Mexico, and has served as special counsel to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on homeowners’ insurance discrimination. We also represent and advise the California Earthquake Authority in a broad range of governmental and insurance-law issues.
Proposition 103
As special counsel to the California Insurance Commissioner, we have played a pivotal role in the implementation of Proposition 103. The firm designed the Commissioner’s rate‑regulation program, drafted the regulations, and tried the test cases brought by the insurance industry, resulting in the program being upheld against all challenges. (Amwest Surety Ins. Co. v. Wilson (1997) 11 Cal. 4th 1243; 20th Century v. Garamendi (1994) 8 Cal. 4th 216, cert. denied sub nom Century National Ins. Co. v. Quackenbush (1995) 513 U.S. 1153; State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Quackenbush (1999) 77 Cal. App. 4th 65; Fireman’s Fund Ins. Companies v. Quackenbush (1997) 52 Cal. App. 4th 599; Safeco Ins. Co. v. Garamendi (1992) 11 Cal. App. 4th 1141; State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Garamendi (1992) 12 Cal. App. 4th 206; Wilshire Ins. Co. v. Garamendi (1992) 5 Cal. App. 4th 1573; California Auto. Assigned Risk Plan v. Garamendi (1991) 234 Cal. App. 3d 1486; Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Quackenbush (9th Cir. 1997) 87 F.3d 290; Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Garamendi (N.D. Cal. 1992) 790 F. Supp. 938.)
Unfair Insurance Practices
We served as lead counsel for the Department of Insurance’s successful prosecution of PacifiCare Life & Health Insurance Company for over 900,000 violations of the Unfair Insurance Practices Act. (In re PacifiCare Life & Health Ins. Co., No. UPA 2007-00004.)
Insurance Discrimination
On behalf of the California Insurance Commissioner and in conjunction with several local and national civil rights and consumer rights organizations, we won a judgment declaring new state insurance legislation invalid and unconstitutional. The statutory amendments in question discriminated against previously uninsured drivers in direct violation of Proposition 103. (Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights, et al. v. Garamendi, L.A. Sup. Ct., No. BS086235.)
Title Insurance
We developed for the California Insurance Commissioner a program to regulate title‑insurance rates, including a statistical plan to reveal for the first time how title and escrow companies price their products.
California Earthquake Authority
The firm is counsel to the California Earthquake Authority (CEA), the state instrumentality created to write residential earthquake insurance after the private industry withdrew from the market following the Northridge Earthquake. We advise the Authority on regulatory, intergovernmental, and technical issues, and represent it in judicial and administrative litigation.
By way of example, we represented the CEA in securities litigation against an affiliate of Wells Fargo Bank that had invested CEA funds in inappropriate commercial paper that lost its value in the late-2000s subprime mortgage crisis.
We also successfully represented the Authority in litigation challenging the Governor’s authority to involuntarily furlough its employees in response to shortfalls in the state’s general fund. The litigation resulted in the CEA being just one of five state entities exempted from the furloughs, granting the CEA the ability to pay its employees in full. (Serv. Employees Int’l Union, Local 1000 v. Brown (2011) 197 Cal. App. 4th 252.)
