Indiana Supreme Court Approves Insurer Use of In-House Counsel to Defend Policyholders from Third-Party Claims but Forbids Captive Law Firms from Portraying Themselves as outside Councel

By Stempel, Jeffrey W. | Journal of Risk and Insurance, March 2000 | Go to article overview

Indiana Supreme Court Approves Insurer Use of In-House Counsel to Defend Policyholders from Third-Party Claims but Forbids Captive Law Firms from Portraying Themselves as outside Councel


Stempel, Jeffrey W., Journal of Risk and Insurance


Cincinnati Insurance Company v. Wills, 717 N.E.2d 151 (Indiana Supreme CourtOctober 6,1999)

In recent years, there has been considerable focus on the legal ethics of representation of policyholders pursuant to liability policies. Recently, the Indiana Supreme Court weighed in on aspects of the issue. The court's assessment was largely consistent with decisions in other states. In general, insurers have successfully resisted legal attacks on their use of in-house counsel to represent policyholders against thirdparty tort claims under standard liability policies.

The Wills case started like most liability claims. David and Marcia Wills asserted tort claims against Elaine Mellenger and Betty Suter. Suter was insured by Celina Insurance Group, who appointed in-house counsel Keith Faber to defend Suter in the Wills action. After being apprised of Faber's house counsel status, Suter consented to the representation. The Wills moved to disqualify Faber, asserting that his representation of Suter would be unauthorized practice of law. While the case was pending, Cincinnati Insurance sought to intervene because of the possible effect of the case on Cincinnati's practice of representing policyholders in the area through Berlon & Timmel, which Cincinnati characterized as a "captive law firm." Berlon & Timmel "is staffed exclusively by employees of Cincinnati who represent only Cincinnati's insureds and Cincinnati itself." 717 N.E.2d at 153.

The Wills disqualification motion succeeded before the trial court, which ruled that insurer Celina engaged in unauthorized practice of law by giving its policyholders legal representation through in-house counsel. The trial court further viewed the inhouse lawyer as assisting unauthorized practice by the nonlaw-firm insurance company, a violation of Indiana Rule of Professional Conduct 5.5(b).' The trial court also found Cincinnati's use of Berlon & Timmel to be an unauthorized practice of law and a deceptive practice that would lead policyholders to erroneously think that they were being represented by outside counsel.

The Indiana Supreme Court reversed the trial court on the issue of unauthorized practice, with regard to both Celina's in-house counsel and Cincinnati's captive firm, but affirmed the trial court ruling that an insurer's captive law firm, could not do business under a name that suggested that it was an outside law firm apart from the insurer's organization.

The Indiana Supreme Court began its analysis with an overview of the types of arguments that have been employed to suggest unauthorized practice by staff counsel and captive firms. The court also summarized legal developments on the issue to date, specifically noting that eight states and the ABA have, in ethics opinions, concluded that practice through in-house counsel does not constitute unauthorized practice in and of itself.2 In two states, challenges to policyholder representation have been successful: in Kentucky based on potential conflict of interest between insurer and policyholders and in North Carolina based on a state statutory bar to practice of law by a corporation.4

The court found that Celina's notice to its policyholder had been sufficient to alert the insured to the situation and was not misleading. In disclosing the in-house status of attorney Faber, Celina had apparently informed the policyholder that the assigned attorney's primary loyalty was to the policyholder and that confidences between policyholder and attorney could not be shared with the insurer.

As to unauthorized practice, the court found that in-house counsel was generally accepted and that counsel's legal services for the company were clearly authorized under the Rules of Professional Conduct. Although the situation is more complicated when the company lawyer is representing a customer of the company, the court found this to be permissible because the rendering of legal service was done by an attorney who was subject to the control of the policyholder client rather than the nonlawyer company. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Indiana Supreme Court Approves Insurer Use of In-House Counsel to Defend Policyholders from Third-Party Claims but Forbids Captive Law Firms from Portraying Themselves as outside Councel
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.