California Court of Appeal

In plaintiff's petition for a writ of mandate seeking to compel the Commissioner of the California Department of Insurance to pursue additional remedies against the insurers that will inure to the benefit of class members, in his suit against the insurers on behalf of himself and California residents holding disability income policies issued by the insurers who, like him, submitted no claims under their policies but allegedly were overcharged for their policies in view of the insurers' unlawfully restrictive claims procedures and who received no benefit under the terms of the settlement agreement, trial court's grant of Commissioner's motion to dismiss is affirmed where: 1) even on the questionable assumption that plaintiff and purported class members suffered economic harm as a result of the insurers' claim practices that have not been corrected, the Commissioner was not required to pursue any remedy on their behalf; and 2) nothing in the record suggests that the decision not to pursue additional remedies was so unreasonable as to constitute an abuse of discretion.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/28/2010
• Published 08/12/2010

Judges

• Pollak, J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Todd M. Schneider, Edmund G. Brown, Jr