Discipline for adjuster misconduct can come from several sources – the Department of Insurance or the courts themselves. This course examines the court’s potential responses, and examines how to place into practice – especially during the heated moments during litigation – various Codes of Ethics (69B-220.201 Ethical Requirements): 3(c) – no actions prejudicial to the insured; and 3(d) – truthful and unbiased reports; 3(j) – interviewing witnesses. The course will first review ethical discovery issues raised in Jones v. Publix Super Markets, Inc., – So.3d – (Fla. 5th DCA July 27, 2012). Through this case the course will examine the alleged conduct of the adjuster in light of Code. Next the course will review the presumption of negligence issue in Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Valcin, 507 So.2d 596 (Fla. 1987) (potentially caused by the adjuster). When one party in control of evidence destroys it (or otherwise fails to produce it), how should the courts handle this lack of production? Ethical considerations are reviewed in context with the mediation process. The course exams Hill v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 988 So.2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), where one party disclosed to a physician comments made by counsel for the other party during a mediation (when the discussions were to be confidential). The course then reviews City of Opa Locka v. Williams, 910 So.2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005). This case discusses the appropriate analysis to be conducted by a court in the event of an attorney’s failure to comply with Pretrial instructions. Throughout the various stages of litigation, the code of Ethics can serve to guide adjusters in their actions, and, if not followed, then the courts have established methods by which inappropriate action may be handled.
From 03/27/2020 to 03/27/2020
The course offering for 112079 – WEBINAR: DISCOVERING ETHICS: CONSIDERATIONS DURING LITIGATION from 03/27/2020 to 03/27/2020 has been APPROVED. The Course Offering ID is 1122245.