In this episode of "Don’t Take No for an Answer," Lynda A. Bennett and Alexander B. Corson explore the complex issue of "allocation" in the context of defense costs in insurance claims. They discuss what steps to take when...more
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, applying New York law, has held that one Insured cannot use consent and cooperation provisions in a D&O insurance policy to block coverage for another...more
In Loblaw Companies Limited v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONCA 145, the Ontario Court of Appeal, among other things, overturned the lower court’s finding that insureds were entitled to seek 100% of...more
The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, applying California law, has held that two former directors and officers were entitled to advancement of defense costs incurred in connection with SEC...more
In Part I (”When Can an Insurer Pursue a Malpractice Claim Against Defense Counsel Retained for an Insured”) of our two-part article published by the ABA’s Insurance Coverage Litigation Committee (ICLC), we addressed the...more
Second Circuit Holds That Malpractice Insurer Has No Duty to Defend or to Indemnify Lawyer Because Of Business Enterprise Exclusion- Associated Industries Insurance Company sued its insureds, a lawyer, and his former law...more
Our December Insurance Update features a few firsts from state high courts. For the first time: •The Supreme Court of Hawaii addresses reimbursement of defense costs. •The Supreme Court of Illinois addresses coverage for...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, applying New York law, held that a former director is not entitled to injunctive relief requiring an excess D&O insurer to pay his defense costs because the director has not...more
In a win for Wiley’s client, the Supreme Court of New York for New York County, applying New York law, has held that no coverage is available for a legal malpractice lawsuit because the “claim” was first made before the...more
Here’s what we discuss in our October Insurance Update. Illinois: Environmental Suits Alleging Non-Compliance with Laws and Regulations Did Not Assert an “Occurrence”- Massachusetts (federal): Insurer May Consider Sums...more
Policyholders purchase liability insurance expecting that, when they are sued, their defense will be paid for by their insurer. Because the key value of liability insurance is that it is really “litigation insurance,” courts...more
Hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of Lowenstein’s Insurance Recovery Group continue their discussion about the difference between the duty to defend, the duty to reimburse, and the duty to advance. They run through the...more
In this episode of “Don’t Take No for an Answer,” hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of Lowenstein’s Insurance Recovery Group discuss the difference between a duty to defend versus a duty to reimburse. They explain why...more
The Delaware Supreme Court has held that Delaware law, rather than Montana law, applies in a dispute over D&O coverage for defense costs incurred in a stockholder appraisal action. Stillwater Mining Co. v. Nat’l Union Fire...more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, applying Michigan law, has held that, even absent an express policy provision regarding recoupment, an insurer was entitled to recoup defense costs after...more
The First Court of Appeals in Houston affirmed an analysis that involved math and application of the Texas Insurance Code. In Jones v. Allstate Vehicle & Property Insurance Company, 2022 Tex. App. LEXIS 8896 (Tex....more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, applying Michigan law, has held that irreconcilable “other insurance” provisions in two polices, each with a concurrent duty to defend, cannot be given...more
Applying Georgia law, a federal district court has held that an insured’s failure to seek consent to incur defense costs pursuant to a consent provision relieved the insurer from any obligation to provide coverage for those...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, applying California law, has held that, under a duty to defend policy, an insurer was required to pay defense costs incurred in a lawsuit where the lawsuit...more
In an insurance recovery case being handled by Payne & Fears partners Scott Thomas and Sarah Odia, an Arizona federal court, applying Nevada law, recently held that NGM Insurance Company breached its duty to defend its...more
In Verizon Communications Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. the Delaware Superior Court ruled that Verizon was entitled to a defense under its D&O policy for fraudulent transfer claims. Although the...more
Answering a certified question regarding a matter of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court has held that an insurer is entitled to reimbursement of defense costs expended in defense of an insured where a determination is...more
The Nevada Supreme Court held that insurers may seek reimbursement of defense costs if a court determines that it owed no duty to defend and the insurer reserved reimbursement rights. In Nautilus Insurance Company v....more
The Second Department, Appellate Division, for the Supreme Court of New York, recently held in a matter of first impression, that an insurance company with a duty to defend may not recover defense costs after a determination...more
Applying Arizona law, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona held that an insurer that breached its duty to defend bears the burden of demonstrating that an allocation of defense costs between covered...more