In a pair of decisions issued this week, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that the notice-prejudice rule applies to occurrence-based, first-party homeowners’ property policies, notwithstanding any contractual notice period...more
The United States District Court for the District of Colorado, applying Colorado law, has held that claimants were not entitled to coverage for default judgments because the insured dentist failed to provide notice of the...more
Insurers frequently raise the timing of notice as a defense to a policyholder’s claim for coverage. This is an “all or nothing defense,” as “late notice” can create a forfeiture of coverage. As a result, it gets litigated...more
The “notice-prejudice” rule gives a pass to policyholders who breach the notice or cooperation provisions of their policies, if the breach is found not to have prejudiced the insurer. Sometimes, the late notice does not...more
On April 25, 2016, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a decision in Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. v. Stresscon Co. Stresscon, a subcontracting concrete company, entered into a settlement agreement – without providing notice to its...more
On Monday, April 25, 2016, the Colorado Supreme Court issued its decision in Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. v. Stresscon Co., No. 13SC815 (Colo. Apr. 25, 2016), holding that an insurer does not need to show prejudice to enforce a...more
On February 17, 2015, the Colorado Supreme Court issued Craft v. Phila. Indem. Ins. Co., No. 14sa43, 2015 WL 658785 (Colo. Feb. 17, 2015), in which it held the notice-prejudice rule applicable to occurrence policies does not...more