In September 2016, an attorney representing Mr. Ulin sent a notice to GEICO General Insurance Company, Mr. Kurth's insurer. The attorney asked GEICO to retain relevant evidence and to "provide [Mr. Ulin] with a certified copy of the insurance policy in effect on December 4, 2015, covering the vehicle involved in this accident."

Mr. Ulin filed a lawsuit in December 2017 against several defendants, including the unknown driver, Mr. Cape, and GEICO.

GEICO moved to dismiss. It asserted that Mr. Ulin had failed to state a claim against GEICO for which relief could be granted. GEICO acknowledged that it insured the vehicle owned by Mr. Kurth, but claimed that Alaska law precluded a plaintiff from bringing suit directly against an alleged tortfeasor's insurer for bad faith and that a plaintiff could "not sue an alleged tortfeasor's insurer directly for the alleged negligence of its insured."

In response, Mr. Ulin claimed that "the cause of action directed against [GEICO] would be a duty owed to [Mr. Ulin] for damages he received as a result of the accident caused by [GEICO]'s insured." He also stated that GEICO "demonstrated bad faith and unfair dealing in the claims handling process when counsels representing [Mr. Ulin] contacted the insurer with claims and requests for disclosure and production of information." He stated that this bad faith conduct was actionable. Mr. Ulin further indicated that he might amend or supplement his claims against GEICO at a later time.

The trial court granted GEICO's motion to dismiss, and the dispute reached the Supreme Court of Alaska.

The Alaska Supreme Court's Decision

The court affirmed.

In its decision, the court explained that it had rejected the proposition that an insurer owed an injured claimant a general duty of good faith and fair dealing, explaining that the duty of good faith and fair dealing was "a product of the fiduciary relationship created by the contract between the insurer and its insured."

The court also pointed out that it had rejected Mr. Ulin's argument that such a duty arose from the statutes and regulations governing insurance companies, explaining that AS 21.36.125 in particular prohibited "acts committed so frequently as to become a trade practice" but that it did "not readily lend itself to enforcement by a private cause of action arising from a single claim."

Accordingly, the court affirmed the trial court's order dismissing Mr. Ulin's claims against GEICO.

The case is Ulin v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., No. S-17113, No. 1749 (Alaska Nov. 27, 2019). Attorneys involved include: Barry J. Kell, Kell & Associates, P.C., Anchorage, for Appellee GEICO General Insurance Company.