RPC 92

Representation of Insured and Insurer

Opinion rules that an attorney representing both the insurer and the insured need not surrender to the insured copies of all correspondence concerning the case between herself and the insurer.

Editor's Note: This opinion was originally published as RPC 92 (Revised).

Inquiry:

We have been retained by a title insurance company to defend title in connection with a quiet title action which has been commenced against a named insured of the title insurance company. The title insurance policy provides that the title insurance company "will defend your title in any court case that is based on a matter insured against." In addition to the claim seeking to quiet title, the plaintiff has asserted a claim against the insured, personally, seeking to recover punitive damages in connection with the transaction pursuant to which title to the disputed property was transferred to the insured. The title insurance company has advised the insured that the punitive claim involves a potential loss which is not covered by the title insurance policy and has invited the insured to secure independent counsel for the purpose of providing a defense with respect to this claim, and the insured has done so. The title insurance company now has received a settlement offer which is for a sum less than the insured value of the property in dispute. To avoid the potential punitive exposure, the insured, through independent counsel, has demanded that the title insurance company settle the dispute and has put the title insurance company on notice regarding a potential bad faith claim. The insured now has asked us in writing to provide the insured with copies of all correspondence which we have sent to the title insurance company regarding this matter. This correspondence contains our thoughts and impressions regarding the case in general and our assessments regarding the possible outcome of the litigation.

The issue which the insured's request presents is whether we have an obligation to the insured, as a client, to provide the requested information or whether we have an obligation to the title insurance company which is simply discharging its duty to defend title which is in dispute, as a client, not to provide information which the insured may subsequently attempt to use in a manner adverse to the insurance company.

Opinion:

While Rule 6(b)(1) obligates an attorney to keep the client reasonably informed about the status of the case and to comply with reasonable requests for information, there is nothing in the rules that requires defense counsel to furnish to the insured correspondence directed to the insurer during defense counsel's active representation of the insured. The representation of insured and insurer is a dual one, but the attorney's primary allegiance is to the insured, whose best interest must be served at all times. The attorney should keep the insurance company informed as to the wishes of the insured concerning the defense of the case and settlement. The attorney should also keep the insured informed of his or her evaluation of the case as well as the assessment of the insurance company, with appropriate advice to the insured with regard to the employment of independent counsel whenever the attorney cannot fully represent his or her interest. Further, if the attorney reasonably believes that it is in the best interest of the insured to provide him or her with work product directed to the insurer, such information may be disclosed to the insured without violating any ethical duty to the insurer.