Extrinsic Evidence

News & Analysis as of

Ninth Circuit Holds Extrinsic Facts Triggered Duty to Defend

In its recent decision in Burlington Ins. Co. v. CHWC, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3941 (9th Cir. Mar. 3, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, had occasion to consider an...more

Policyholders Win Key Decision in Florida

After a July 3, 2013 Florida Supreme Court decision, it is crystal clear that ambiguous terms in an insurance policy must be construed in favor of coverage and of the insured without first resorting to extrinsic evidence to...more

Massachusetts Court Allows Consideration of Extrinsic Evidence

In its recent decision in BioChemics, Inc. v. AXIS Reinsurance Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111218 (D. Mass. Aug. 7, 2013), the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts had occasion to consider when an...more

Policy Observer - July 2013

Getting Over the Bar: Second Circuit Requires Actual Payment of Underlying Limits In Order to Trigger Excess D&O Policies - In June, the Second Circuit held that two Federal Insurance Company ("FIC") excess D&O...more

Florida High Court Precludes Use of Extrinsic Evidence to Construe Ambiguous Policy Language

In what may be described as a controversial 4-3 decision, the Florida Supreme Court in Washington National Insurance Corp. v. Ruderman, No. SC12-323, 2013 WL 3333059 (Fla. July 3, 2013), held that ambiguous language in an...more

Florida Bars Use of Extrinsic Evidence to Resolve Insurance Policy Ambiguities

On July 3, 2013, a closely divided Florida Supreme Court held that judges were required to interpret ambiguous policy language strictly against the insurer and in favor of coverage, and that courts should not first attempt to...more

Appellate Notes: Week of March 25

In This Issue: - SC18915- Misiti, LLC v. Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America - SC18840- New England Road, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission - SC18804- Cordero v. University of Connecticut...more

New California Supreme Court Case Opens Door to Attacks on Contracts

For the past 70 years, California courts have held that a party is barred from claiming fraud based on an alleged oral misrepresentation that directly contradicts the express terms of a written agreement. This rule had long...more

Patton Boggs Reinsurance Newsletter - March 2013: A Brief Review of Reinsurance Trends in 2012: Contractual Interpretation

From ambiguities in contractual provisions to waivers of rights, 2012 was a year rich with court decisions interpreting reinsurance contract provisions. At least four courts relied, in part, upon extrinsic evidence in...more

Eleventh Circuit Allows Consideration of Extrinsic Evidence

In its recent decision in American Safety Indemnity Co. v. T.H. Taylor, 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 5072 (11th Cir. March 14, 2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, applying Alabama law, had occasion to...more

The Fourth Circuit Opens the Door to Extrinsic Evidence in Considering a Claim for Employee Benefits

Executive Summary: The Fourth Circuit expands the scope of admissible evidence in an ERISA employee benefits case. The very first principle applied in a lawsuit for benefits from an ERISA-governed employee benefit plan...more

Litigation Alert: California Supreme Court Announces Sea-Change in Rules Governing Use of Parol Evidence to Show Fraud in Contract...

Background - On January 14, 2013, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision clarifying – and ultimately rewriting – the applicable legal standard for introduction of parol evidence to show that a contract...more

12 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1