California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Superior Court, 211 Cal.App.3d 5, 259 Cal.Rptr. 50 (Cal. App. 1989):
11 We note, however, that insurer participation would not be necessary in all cases. For example, it would not be required where the insurer has denied coverage and refused to provide a defense. In such a circumstance, the insured is free to agree with the claimant to a judgment resolving the issue of his liability which, if coverage is subsequently established, would constitute a final judicial determination of that liability binding upon the insurer even though it was not a party to the action or to the agreement. (Samson v. Transamerica Ins. Co. (1981) 30 Cal.3d 220, 237-241, 178 Cal.Rptr. 343, 636 P.2d 32.) No principled reason exists for recognizing the absent insurer's liability to the claimant for the amount of such judgment yet not recognizing the stipulated resolution of the liability issue for purposes of a subsequent action by the claimant against the insurer under Insurance Code section 790.03, subdivision (h).
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.