Integon Preferred Insurance Company v. Wilcox
2:21-cv-01501
| W.D. Wash. | Aug 22, 2025Background
- Integon Preferred Insurance Company filed suit against Daniel and Elizabeth Wilcox, with related counterclaims and third-party claims by the Wilcoxes against their attorney and others.
- The case involves issues of insurance coverage, alleged failure to notify the insurer (Integon) of a lawsuit, and related claims of breach of contract, bad faith, and violation of Washington insurance laws.
- The Wilcoxes failed to tender the underlying lawsuit to Integon as required under the policy, resulting in a default judgment against them.
- The District Court previously entered summary judgment in favor of Integon, dismissing the Wilcoxes’ claims due to lack of timely notice, and found Integon was prejudiced by the failure.
- After a partial remand from the Ninth Circuit, the District Court reaffirmed that Integon’s duty to defend was relieved, but third-party claims against the Wilcoxes’ attorney remained.
- The Court granted a joint motion to stay proceedings and certified four dispositive summary judgment orders for interlocutory appeal, citing judicial efficiency and risk of inconsistent results if appeals were delayed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duty to Defend After Late Notice | Wilcox failed to notify and provide papers | Integon was not properly notified, was prejudiced | Wilcox's failure relieved Integon of duty to defend; summary judgment granted |
| Breach of Contract and Bad Faith | Integon breached insurance obligations | Wilcox’s failure caused denial of coverage | Claims dismissed; court found in favor of Integon |
| Certification for Interlocutory Appeal | Certification needed for judicial economy | No opposition from Integon | Certification for appeal granted under Rule 54(b) |
| Stay of Proceedings Pending Appeal | Needed to avoid wasted resources | No opposition from Integon | District Court proceedings stayed indefinitely |
Key Cases Cited
- Wood v. GCC Bend, LLC, 422 F.3d 873 (9th Cir. 2005) (Rule 54(b) certification and avoidance of piecemeal appeals)
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Gen. Elec. Co., 446 U.S. 1 (1980) (Rule 54(b) standard for final judgment in multi-claim actions)
- Jewel v. Nat’l Sec. Agency, 810 F.3d 622 (9th Cir. 2015) (appellate review of Rule 54(b) certification)
- Martin v. Pierce, 34 F.4th 1125 (9th Cir. 2022) (appellate jurisdiction under Rule 54(b))
- Tegman v. Accident & Medical Investigations, 150 Wn.2d 102 (Wash. 2003) (apportionment of liability)