Miller Marital Deduction Trust v. Zurich American Insurance Company, — P.3d –, 2019 WL 5304862; First Appellate District Court of Appeal, Division Three, Case No. A155398 (October 21, 2019). In Miller Marital Deduction...more
Recently, once again, a California appeals court weighed in on the scope of the right to Cumis counsel and the meaning of Cal. Civil Code §2860. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Company v. McMillin Homes Construction, Inc., No....more
The Nevada Supreme Court has adopted California’s independent counsel rules, holding that an insured is entitled to select its own counsel where an insurer’s coverage reservation creates an actual conflict of interest between...more
Unfair Trade Practices Exclusion Doesn't Cover Consumer Protection Suits - Why it matters: An unfair trade practices clause did not bar coverage for a policyholder's subsidiary, an Illinois federal court ruled, ordering...more
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
On April 30, 2015, we blogged about Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. J.R. Marketing, LLC, Case No. S211645, then set for oral argument in the California Supreme Court. [see the prior post: California’s “Independent”...more
On August 10, 2015, the California Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision that could have broad implications regarding an insurer’s right to seek reimbursement of unreasonable fees and costs directly from so-called Cumis...more
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
On May 5, the California Supreme Court will hear argument in a case that has the potential to profoundly change the relationship between the insurer, its insured and the insured’s independent defense counsel under Civil Code...more
Time for a Change? California Revisits Henkel on Coverage for Contractually Acquired Liabilities - The California Supreme Court’s unexpected decision earlier this year to accept review of Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court,...more
In the last two months, courts in California have issued several decisions concerning the scope of an insurer’s duty to defend its insured in underlying litigation. These decisions address important matters involving the...more
Let's say that you or your client is sued for breach of contract and negligence. You send the suit papers to the general liability insurer and it agrees to defend the claim, but under a "reservation of rights." The basis of...more