California Court of Appeal

Attorneys-in-fact for subscribers of reciprocal insurance exchanges may be sued by subscribers to recover alleged excessive fees the attorneys-in-fact collected in breach of their fiduciary duty to subscribers where the attorneys-in-fact are entities distinct from the exchanges, with fiduciary relationships with each of the subscribers.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/18/2008
• Published 03/18/2008

Judges

• WILLHITE, Acting P.J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack, Walter J. Lack, Daniel G. Whalen, Los Angeles;  Girardi & Keese, Thomas V. Girardi, Graham LippSmith, Los Angeles;  Law Offices of Joe K. Longley, Joe K. Longley;  The Gallagher Law Firm, Michael Gallagher, Los Angeles;  Burrow & Parrott, David Burrow;  Law Offices of Philip K. Maxwell and Philip K. Maxwell for Plaintiffs and Appellants., Harvey Rosenfield and Pamela M. Pressley, Santa Monica, for The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Plaintiffs and Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Joren S. Bass, Richard J. Zuromski, Jr., and Raoul D. Kennedy, San Francisco, for Defendants and Appellants.