The Court found that the lower court had abused its discretion when it required the insurer's corporate representative to respond to questions regarding underwriting materials without imposing any limitations tailored to the claim at issue and to respond to questions about marketing when the insured did not allege that advertising influenced her decision to purchase the policy at issue but that it had not abused its discretion by requiring testimony about the insurer's compensation structure and the existence and location of electronically stored information related to the insured's claim.
Reviewing the Case Document is for members only. Please login