The Second Circuit Court of Appeals recently found an insurer’s decision to waive discovery foreclosed its ability to provide extrinsic evidence to resolve an ambiguous insurance policy. In Ezrasons Inc. v. Travelers...more
In March 2020, Mudpie Inc.—a San Francisco children’s store—ceased operations when California Governor Gavin Newsom ordered all “non-essential” businesses to close due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Because of the shut-down,...more
An issue that often arises when an insurer is determining whether a policy provides coverage for bodily injury or property damage under a liability policy is the number of occurrences that may be triggered under the policy. ...more
The US Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (Panel) previously declined to centralize all coronavirus (COVID-19)-related business interruption insurance lawsuits, but left open the possibility of certain...more
On July 11, 2019, in Magnetek, Inc. v. The Travelers Indem. Co., Case No. 17 C 3173, Judge Robert Gettleman of the Northern District of Illinois issued an important decision preserving insurance coverage for a former...more
A new Sixth Circuit decision may signal an emerging trend on whether insurers must cover claims made by policyholders who fall victim to phishing scams....more
In a recent federal court decision out of Colorado, Travelers failed to convince the Court that it had no duty to defend its insured based on its IP exclusion (barring coverage for patent infringement claims). Travelers’...more
When coverage is at issue, the interplay between a policy’s language and an insurer’s duties under the Claims Administration Statute, Florida Statute Section 627.426, becomes a key factor in claims handling for insurers. In...more