law governs the Question, and our certification thereof is appropriately addressed to the Supreme Court of Kentucky. (iv) We turn next to the contentions of the parties regarding the merits of the Question. Brewer maintains that the Coverage Claim, although in form a negligence action, is grounded in the Maynards’ contractual relationship with National Indemnity and that it is properly assignable like any other contract claim. In support of this proposition, Brewer relies on a decision of the Court of Appeals of Kentucky holding that, although a claim in tort is generally not assignable in Kentucky, this rule does not apply to a tort founded upon contract and growing out of a contractual relationship. See Grundy v. Manchester Ins. & Indem. Co., 425 S.W.2d 735, 737 (Ky.Ct.App.1968) (<HOLDING>). Although relevant, this decision focused on
holding assignable to injured party insureds claim against insurer for judgment in excess of policy limits holding assignable to injured party insureds claim against insurer for negligently failing to claim contribution holding insurer not liable for bad faith when it denied insureds claim based on a good faith dispute regarding the interpretation of a rule holding that bad faith handling of an insureds claim fell within the act holding assignable to injured party insureds claim against liability insurer for bad faith in negotiating settlement