Fifth Circuit Reverses Mississippi District Court’s Interpretation of “Ambiguous” Language to Nullify Defense Within Limits Coverage

by Carlton Fields

Carlton Fields

Insurance policies that include the cost of defending a particular claim or action within the policy’s limit of liability, often referred to as “burning,” “eroding,” or “defense within” limits policies, are common in the management liability insurance market. As we previously reported, a 2015 United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi decision cast a cloud of doubt over liability insurers issuing defense within limits policies in Mississippi when it held that an insurance policy, which included industry standard defense within limits language, was ambiguous, both on its face and in light of the Mississippi law, and, thus, the defense costs the insurer, Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”) had paid pursuant to a reservation of rights did not erode the policy limits. This nullification of key policy language provided a blank check for the insured, the exact opposite of the intended purpose of a defense within limits policy.

Given that odd outcome, we predicted the Fifth Circuit might interpret the policy language differently. Thankfully for insurers, in Federal Insurance Co. v. Singing River Health Systems, No. 15-60774 (5th Cir. Mar. 1, 2017), the Fifth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision and ruled that, pursuant to the particular policy language, the insured’s defense costs counted against the policy limits.

The underlying directors and officers policy at issue in the Singing River decision (the “Policy”) contained multiple pronouncements that Federal did not intend to assume any obligation to pay any defense costs beyond the policy limits. Several provisions throughout the Policy stated that defense costs erode, reduce, and exhaust policy limits. Numerous courts throughout the country (though not in Mississippi) have previously enforced identical provisions. The Policy also expressly established an option for the insured to purchase defense cost coverage outside the Policy’s limit of liability. Despite these multiple statements and the apparent intent to limit defense costs, the district court determined that the language on which Federal relied to limit its obligation to pay defense costs was insufficiently clear to warrant enforcement.

The Singing River Health Association’s Claims

The Singing River decision represents a significant chapter in an ongoing saga involving alleged financial mismanagement at Singing River Health System (SRHS). SRHS stopped making contributions to its employee retirement plan but failed to disclose that fact to its employees. In October 2014, SRHS finally disclosed that the retirement plan was underfunded by more than $100 million. The next month, the SRHS Board of Trustees voted to terminate the retirement plan and a slew of lawsuits soon followed (the “SRHS Lawsuits”). SRHS subsequently submitted the lawsuits for coverage under the Policy issued by Federal, which provided two coverage sections: (1) Fiduciary Liability Coverage and (2) Executive, Entity, and Employment Practices Liability (“D&O/EPL Coverage”). The D&O/EPL Coverage section provided a $5 million limit of liability and the Fiduciary Liability Coverage section provided a $1 million limit of liability. Federal agreed to defend all insureds under the Fiduciary Liability Coverage section, subject to a reservation of rights.

A Reservation of Rights Does Not Create an Unlimited Duty to Defend Without Regard to Policy Limits

The Policy clearly stated that defense costs would erode the limits of liability and SRHS specifically declined to purchase extra coverage for defense costs. Nonetheless, SRHS argued that, given Federal’s reservation of rights, public policy prevented Federal from enforcing the “defense within limits” policy language.

Mississippi, like many other jurisdictions, has recognized the widely accepted rule that when an insured is entitled to independent counsel because it is defending under a reservation of rights, the insurer is required to pay for the independent counsel. Moeller v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Co., 707 So.2d 1062 (Miss. 1996).

SRHS attempted to expand that rule by arguing that the Policy defined a “Loss” as those sums the insured is “legally obligated to pay,” and that, pursuant to Moeller, an insurer asserting a reservation of rights is legally obligated to pay for independent counsel. Thus, under this theory, once Federal reserved its rights, SRHS was no longer “legally obligated to pay the defense costs” and therefore SRHS’s defense costs no longer qualified as a loss that could erode policy limits.

The Fifth Circuit rejected SRHS’s public policy argument. Recognizing that the Policy explicitly stated that defense costs erode the policy limit, and that nothing in Moeller “undercut the basic premise that, without the insurance policy, the attorneys’ fees incurred in defending a case would be borne by the client either under contract law, a theory of unjust enrichment, or otherwise,” the Fifth Circuit held that the Policy’s defense-within-limits language was not prohibited as a matter of law and that Moeller does not create a prohibition on a defense-within-limits policy as a matter of public policy.

Thus, insurers issuing defense within limits policies in Mississippi can breathe a sigh of relief that the Fifth Circuit has recognized the enforceability of these policies and rejected an effort to expand the implications of an insurer’s decision to defend under a reservation of rights.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Carlton Fields | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Carlton Fields

Carlton Fields on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.