Integon Preferred Insurance Company v. Wilcox

Holding: The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer on the duty-to-defend claim and affirmed the denial of summary judgment to the insureds on their extra-contractual counterclaims.
Standard: De novo review of summary judgment; Washington law standard for prejudice from late notice.
Vote: Unpublished memorandum disposition by a panel of three judges.
Practical effect: The decision requires the district court to reconsider the duty-to-defend claim and related counterclaims, as the issue of prejudice from late notice is a question of fact for a jury.

Integon Preferred Insurance Company v. Wilcox

June 2, 2026 ·2:21-cv-01501-BJR ·Unpublished · By Aisha Johnson

The Ninth Circuit reversed in part and affirmed in part a district court order regarding an insurance dispute. The court found a genuine dispute of material fact existed concerning whether the insurer was prejudiced by late notice.

Background

Daniel and Elizabeth Wilcox appealed orders granting summary judgment to Integon Preferred Insurance Company on a duty-to-defend claim and related extra-contractual counterclaims. The district court had also denied summary judgment to the Wilcoxes on those counterclaims. The case involved a dispute over whether the insureds provided prompt notice of a lawsuit to the insurer.

The court’s reasoning

The court reviewed the grant of summary judgment de novo. It determined that under Washington law, an insurer is not relieved of duties unless it shows actual and substantial prejudice from a breach of a prompt notice provision. The court found that a reasonable jury could conclude Elizabeth Wilcox gave prompt notice when she called the company on February third, two thousand and twenty, stating she had not heard about the lawsuit in two years. Because the record did not prove prejudice as a matter of law, the court could not affirm the summary judgment on the duty-to-defend claim.

What it means going forward

The decision requires the district court to reconsider the duty-to-defend claim and related counterclaims, as the issue of prejudice from late notice is a question of fact for a jury.