Janet Jones v. Allstate Insurance Company

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court held that an Allstate claims adjuster who developed a nonadversarial relationship with unrepresented claimants, prepared and completed a release and settlement check, and advised the claimants to sign without disclosing her conflict of interest, explaining the potential legal consequences, or referring them to independent counsel was engaged in the practice of law and fell below the standard of care of a practicing attorney. The court permitted adjusters to continue such activity conditioned on compliance with attorney standards of care, declined to reach whether the conduct was the unauthorized practice of law because no injunctive relief was requested, and held that Jeremy France could not assert accord and satisfaction because the routinely printed full-satisfaction language on Allstate's computer-generated check was not tendered in good faith and the accord was not made upon full revelation. The court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment and remanded for the bad faith, civil fraud, and Consumer Protection Act claims, the remaining claims, and damages. Justice Madsen, dissenting, joined by three justices, would have imposed only a narrow duty to disclose non-representation and advise consulting counsel, would have found proximate-cause fact issues precluding summary judgment on liability, and would have reversed, including on the accord and satisfaction defense.