I'm aware of the case. But again, my experiences as a three decade plus customer, and my experiences as an advocate, haven't found SF to be unreasonable in any matter I've been associated with.

My experiences include several extended family member incidents where settlements were made in light of alleged conduct. Not once was anyone even remotely close to proceeding to trial. My experiences include a few UM and collision claims where the at fault person was uninsured or unknown, and with one exception, quickly corrected, settlements were prompt and reasonable. My experiences also include situations where either SF was the other party's liability carrier or our UM and medpay were accessible in addition to the other party's limited coverage.

I am not claiming SF, or any insurance company, is anywhere near perfect. None are of course. I'm simply stating I've not yet personally come across circumstances like the Campbell's or any circumstances that would make a t-rex wanna go gnaw on their bones.

Since you're in a different circumstance, luck to your client in an accord being reached prior to trial. Jury's are the best decisionmakers we got, but that also means they are sometimes simply the best of the available crapshoots.