David F. Hauge

David Hauge, Chair of M&R’s Transactional Department, brings to his insurance company, broker and agent clientele more than three decades of industry know-how.

Before entering private practice, David was general counsel and then Vice President, Commercial Lines, for a major insurer. The operational experience afforded by these positions enables him to advise clients in a way that sets David apart from his peers. Indeed, by virtue of his first-hand understanding of the insurance business – from ratemaking and claims to production and underwriting – David applies a solution-based approach to insurance-related legal issues that is pragmatic, decidedly focused on clients’ operational concerns and cost-effective.

David frequently provides advice in connection with insurance regulatory and compliance matters, the defense of unfair business practice and class action lawsuits (typically alleging excessive premiums), market conduct and financial examinations, rate filings and broker/agent licensing. Regarding the latter categories, his familiarity interacting and negotiating with any number of Departments of Insurance and fluency in the administrative process have proven to be an invaluable asset for many clients. In addition, David handles complex insurance company and brokerage mergers and acquisitions, reinsurance arbitrations and mediations as well as a litigation involving policies of business owners' liability, workers compensation and surplus lines insurance.

 A veteran expert witness, arbitrator and mediator himself, David has also served as outside general counsel for several insurers.

Education

David earned a J.D. from University of Tulsa School of Law. During law school, Mr. Hauge served as a judicial clerk for District Judge Ronald Ricketts in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Prior to that, he received a B.A. in Psychology and Business Management from San Diego State University.

Representative Matters

• Agent/Broker Licensing: Successfully defended insurance brokerage in connection with the denial of its application to the Department of Insurance for a California Non-Resident Broker License based on a prior felony plea by its owner. Mitigating evidence, including multiple character witnesses, introduced at the hearing on an order to show cause led to a ruling in favor of the brokerage and issuance of the license sought.
• California Department of Insurance Litigation: Filed a writ of mandate on behalf of several trade associations challenging the authority of the California Department of Insurance to promulgate regulations imposing examination fees on California insurers, which led to a successful motion for summary judgment that resulted in the withdrawal of the regulations.
• Class Action Defense: Teamed with other M&R lawyers to successfully defend seven insurance company clients in King v. National General Insurance Company, et al., in which the United States District Court for the Northern District of California stayed a case of first impression alleging violations of “good driver discount” laws, finding that fundamental issues in the litigation – specifically, determination of Super Group exemption and Affinity Group status – should be addressed by the Department of Insurance pursuant to the primary jurisdiction doctrine.
• Class Action Defense: Successfully defended an insurance broker in connection with a California Department of Insurance order to show cause and related Business & Professions Code 17200 class action lawsuit alleging illegal broker fees in the amount of $3 million. Obtained a dismissal of the class action without costs, as well as a minimal settlement with the CDI.
• Class Action Defense: Participated in joint defense group in A.R. v. Aegis (2001) 92 Cal. App 4th 886, a class action alleging improper homeowner rates charged by a number of insurers in California. Case was resolved by way of a successful demurrer without leave to amend the complaint.
• Class Action Defense: Participated in joint defense group in Walker v. Allstate Indemnity Co., et al. (2000) 77 Cal App. 4th 750, alleging insurers charged improper automobile insurance rates. Case was resolved by way of a successful demurrer without leave to amend the complaint, a decision that was upheld on appeal as set forth in a published opinion often used as precedent to support an insurer’s defense of litigation challenging the viability of premiums.
• Expert Witness: Retained as an expert witness and offered testimony regarding the appropriateness of an insurance company in settling a disputed claim, which specifically led to a favorable resolution for the insurer.
• Expert Witness: Retained as an expert on California Fair Claim Practices Regulations and California Insurance Code 790.03 and offered testimony regarding an automotive repair company’s practices in repairing an automobile that was the subject of an insurance claim. Testimony led to a significantly reduced and favorable settlement for the company.
• Premium Payments: Successfully prosecuted and settled case alleging fraudulent conversion of premium payments brought on behalf of a major life insurer against a California nonprofit that served as third-party administrator to process premiums for certain city employees.
• Proposition 103 Appeal: Represented several insurers required to roll back premiums as the result of the passage of Proposition 103, which significantly changed the way insurance rates in California were regulated. During extended litigation, appealed a superior court order that led to a published opinion in RLI Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (California Department of Insurance) (1996) 51 Cal. App. 4th 415, (1996), in which the appellate court authorized an unprecedented motion to compel discovery against the Department of Insurance. Success on appeal led to a favorable settlement on behalf of insurance company clients.

Media Mentions

Publications

Past Speaking Engagements

Blog Posts

• MetLife and Federal Regulators Battle Over 'Systemically Important' Label
  July 19, 2016
• David Hauge Discusses a Wholesaler’s Duty of Care to the Insured
  January 13, 2015