New Ohio Supreme Court Ruling Returns Protections to Insurance Carriers in Bad Faith Lawsuits

March 2026 / by Elaine Souder

While bad faith claims in Ohio are not new to Ohio insurance carriers or to carriers writing business in Ohio, the Ohio Supreme Court’s February 26, 2026 decision in Eddy v. Farmer’s Property Cas. Ins. Co., Slip Opinion No. 2026-Ohio-626 has greatly changed what materials in claims files are discoverable.

In 2001, when the Ohio Supreme Court issued its decision in Boone v. Vanliner Ins. Co., 2001-Ohio-27, the attorney-client privilege for an insurance company were all but stripped away. By including a claim of bad faith in a lawsuit against an insurance company, insureds freely reviewed conversations between carriers and attorneys, decisions made by an attorney on coverage, or even questions the carrier posed to its attorneys when making coverage decisions. The Eddy decision returned the attorney-client privilege protection and strengthened the work product doctrine protection for insurance companies when they are sued in Ohio.

The Court in Eddy recognized that O.R.C. 2317.02 supersedes the Boone decision and codified attorney-client privilege in insurance bad faith cases. O.R.C. 2317.02, per the Eddy decision, requires that the trial court “must determine that the insured has made a prima facie showing of bad faith and conduct an in-camera review to determine if the required materials are related to bad-faith misconduct.” The Court has made clear that this protection also extends to “documents that reveal” the communications between the carrier and its attorney.

Now, if an insured wants to review conversations between a carrier and its attorney that occurred before a coverage decision was made, she must be able to show the court minimal evidence that the carrier acted in bad faith before the documents are put in front of the judge to review and determine whether the documents are discoverable. Only materials the judge finds that are related to an attorney “aiding or furthering an ongoing or future commission of bad faith by a client” will be discoverable.

In Eddy, the Court clarified that Boone was not meant to remove any protection for work product documents. The work product doctrine is contained in Ohio Civ.R. 26, which provides that materials “prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or by or for that other party’s representative (including his attorney, consultant, surety, indemnitor, insurer, or agent)…” are discoverable “…only upon a showing of good cause therefor.” However, it is important for carriers to be aware that the Eddy decision recognized that these materials can be created before a decision on coverage, as “an insured could threaten litigation, and an attorney could create work product before an insurance company has made a final determination to deny a claim.”

If you have any questions, MRR Law has extensive experience in handling bad faith claims against Ohio carriers and carriers writing business in Ohio. We are here to provide you with the legal knowledge and advice for a successful outcome.

 

Elaine Souder
Attorney
esouder@mrrlaw.com