News & Analysis as of

Commercial General Liability Policies Insureds

Jenner & Block

Client Alert: A Minimum is Not a Maximum: The Texas Supreme Court Rejects a Common Insurer Tactic to Reduce Additional Insured...

Jenner & Block on

It is an all-too-common scenario for insurance practitioners. Company A hires an independent contractor to perform work on its premises. Their agreement specifies that Contractor will procure liability insurance—often...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Court of Appeals Finds That Insurers May Not Participate in Bankruptcy Negotiations by Invoking an Insured’s Duty to Cooperate

In rejecting an insurer’s attempt to block confirmation of its insured’s bankruptcy plan, the Fourth Circuit found that an insurer may not interject itself into plan negotiations by invoking the duty to cooperate, nor does...more

White and Williams LLP

MA SJC Rules Attorney’s Fees Awarded Under G. L. c. 93A Are Not Covered by Liability Policy

White and Williams LLP on

In Vermont Mutual Insurance Company v. Poirier, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled that attorney’s fees awarded under M.G. L. c. 93A are not covered by a Businessowner’s Liability Policy, because such fees...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

First Look - Fall 2021: Insurance Newsletter

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

MASS SHOOTINGS: MULTIPLE CLAIMANT CONSIDERATIONS - In 2020, despite nearly nationwide lockdowns due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States sustained 611 mass shooting events. This represents an increase from 336 in...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

First Look: Spring 2021 Newsletter

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

In the wake of government shutdowns necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic, insureds filed business-interruption and other claims with their commercial-liability insurers. As insurers denied those claims, insureds filed suit,...more

White and Williams LLP

Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

White and Williams LLP on

Is an insured (or putative insured) entitled to recover its legal expenses if it is successful in coverage litigation? In some states, no. In many other states, yes – based on either a statute or common law. In New York...more

Melito & Adolfsen

You May Think You Are Insured as an Additional Insured But You May Find You Are Not Covered

Melito & Adolfsen on

Anyone who hires someone to do construction should ask the contractor to name them as an additional insured on the contractor's policy. The contractor may agree to provide the coverage but then may fail to follow the rules in...more

Cozen O'Connor

California Holds Negligent Hiring, Retention, and Supervision Can State a Covered “Occurrence”

Cozen O'Connor on

In Liberty Surplus Insurance Corp. v. Ledesma & Meyer Construction Co., Inc., No. S236765 (Cal. Jun. 4, 2018), the California Supreme Court found that an insured sued on the basis that it negligently hired, retained, and...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Obligations of Insurer and Policyholder - October 2017

Foley Hoag LLP on

Scope: The “Comparison Test” - The defense obligation arises when a defense is needed: at the outset of the suit. It follows that, unlike the duty to indemnify (which depends on the “true” facts as they are determined in...more

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC

First Look - Summer 2017: Issues and Developments in Insurance Law

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC on

The first step in any coverage analysis is determining who is an insured. Sounds easy, right? Not necessarily. As commentators have noted, “[t]here is a distinction between a ‘named insured’ and an ‘insured.’” Indeed, another...more

K&L Gates LLP

Policyholders Beware: New York Court of Appeals Restricts Additional Insured Coverage Under Common Policy Endorsement to Injuries...

K&L Gates LLP on

Recently, the New York Court of Appeals, in Burlington Insurance Company v. NYC Transit Authority, held that a common insurance policy endorsement extending coverage to additional insureds for liability for bodily injury...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Insurance Recovery Law - September 2015

Exception to Mold Exclusion Requires Defense of Suit Alleging Injuries From Moldy Water - Why it matters: An exclusion for "Fungi or Bacteria" did not prevent a federal court judge in Tennessee from ordering an insurer...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Insurance Recovery Law - August 2015 #2

Good News for Corporate Policyholders: Insurer Cannot Refuse Coverage Based on Insured's Assignment of Rights Under Policies After Loss Has Occurred - Why it matters: Reversing its holding in a 2003 case, the Supreme...more

Proskauer - Insurance Recovery & Counseling

Seventh Circuit Issues Stern Warning For Insurers That Reject Their Duty to Defend

The first line of the Seventh Circuit’s opinion says it all: “This case provides a warning for insurance companies who refuse to defend their insureds.” As the court’s admonishment suggests, insurers that improperly refuse to...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

In Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court (No. S205889; filed 8/20/15), the California Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934, holding that...more

Cozen O'Connor

California Statute Trumps Anti-Assignment Clauses in Liability Insurance Policies

Cozen O'Connor on

In a unanimous decision that will have a serious impact on long-tail exposures, the California Supreme Court in Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court (Hartford Acc. & Indem.) has determined that policyholders may transfer liability...more

Proskauer - Insurance Recovery & Counseling

California Supreme Court Limits Enforceability of Anti-Assignment Clauses

In a unanimous decision handed down by the California Supreme Court on August 20, 2015 in Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court, the court removed a significant obstacle facing companies that want to assign their interests in a...more

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP

CA Supreme Court Permits Insurers to Bring Direct Actions Seeking Reimbursement of Excessive Fees Against Cumis Counsel Under...

The California Supreme Court held in Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, L.L.C. (Squire Sanders) (8/10/2015 - #S211645) that if Cumis counsel, operating under a court order which such counsel drafted and...more

Proskauer - Insurance Recovery & Counseling

Third Circuit Finds Insured v. Insured Exclusion Precludes Recovery of Defense Costs

Many corporate executives may be under the impression that the defense costs they incur when sued for actions taken in their role as officers of the company would be covered by a “Management Protection” insurance policy. The...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

PA Supreme Court Gives Policy Holders Right to Settle Without Insurer Approval

Insurance coverage counsel have been anxiously awaiting the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Am. Nuclear Insurers, 2015 Pa. Lexis 1551 (July 21, 2015), since the high court agreed to hear the...more

Proskauer - Insurance Recovery & Counseling

Montana Joins Majority of Courts Holding That Insurers Must Establish Prejudice to Disclaim Coverage Based on an Insured’s Late...

Joining a majority of states that have addressed the issue, the Montana Supreme Court recently held that “an insurer who does not receive timely notice required by the terms of an insurance policy must demonstrate prejudice...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Insurance Recovery Law - July 2015 #2

California Court: Rejected Demand Within Policy Limits Not Necessary for Bad Faith Claim - Why it matters: Insurers must proceed with caution when they become aware that a settlement within policy limits is possible,...more

Robinson & Cole LLP

Connecticut Court Again Holds That Certificates of Insurance Do Not Confer Rights

Robinson & Cole LLP on

A Connecticut Superior Court has further clarified the construction industry whether a certificate of insurance naming a party as an additional insured confers any rights on that party. In Hobbs, Inc. v. Charter Oak Fire...more

Nossaman LLP

California Insurance Coverage Cases Raising Key Issues On The Horizon

Nossaman LLP on

This year, 2014, is lining up with interesting insurance coverage cases pending across the country which may lead to far reaching decisions. In California specifically, it is apparent to us that the Hartford Insurance...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The New York Court of Appeals Considers the Consequences of a Liability Insurer’s Breach of the Duty to Defend

What are the consequences of a liability insurer’s breach of the duty to defend its insured against a potentially covered claim? Recent decisions from the New York Court of Appeals highlight differing views nationwide on...more

26 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide