S&P500
2369.75
+2.41
+0.10%
 
NASDAQ
5861.9
+16.59
+0.28%
 
NYSE
11558.35
+17.06
+0.15%
 
MMM
186.91
-0.5
-0.27%
 
AXP
80.17
+0.41
+0.51%
 
T
41.82
-0.54
-1.27%
 
BA
179.43
+1.99
+1.12%
 
CAT
97.44
+1.96
+2.05%
 
CVX
111.75
+1.63
+1.48%
 
CSCO
34.26
-0.06
-0.17%
 
KO
41.67
-0.11
-0.26%
 
DD
79.23
-0.58
-0.73%
 
XOM
81.54
+0.46
+0.57%
 
GE
29.94
-0.25
-0.83%
 
GS
249.33
+1.98
+0.80%
 
HD
145.3
-0.65
-0.45%
 
INTC
36.51
-0.02
-0.05%
 
IBM
179.4
-1.95
-1.08%
 
JNJ
122.4
-0.33
-0.27%
 
JPM
90.43
+0.1
+0.11%
 
MCD
126.99
-0.72
-0.56%
 
MRK
65.85
-0.31
-0.47%
 
MSFT
64.23
-0.39
-0.60%
 
NKE
57.69
-0.17
-0.29%
 
PFE
34.28
+0.02
+0.06%
 
PG
90.89
-0.16
-0.18%
 
TRV
122.04
-0.23
-0.19%
 
UNH
165.38
+2.32
+1.42%
 
UTX
112.81
+0.35
+0.31%
 
VZ
49.94
-0.66
-1.30%
 
V
88
-0.43
-0.49%
 
WMT
71.74
-0.65
-0.90%
 
DIS
110.23
-0.09
-0.08%
 
S&P500
2369.75
+2.41
+0.10%
 
NASDAQ
5861.9
+16.59
+0.28%
 
NYSE
11558.35
+17.06
+0.15%
 
MMM
186.91
-0.5
-0.27%
 
AXP
80.17
+0.41
+0.51%
 
T
41.82
-0.54
-1.27%
 
BA
179.43
+1.99
+1.12%
 
CAT
97.44
+1.96
+2.05%
 
CVX
111.75
+1.63
+1.48%
 
CSCO
34.26
-0.06
-0.17%
 
KO
41.67
-0.11
-0.26%
 
DD
79.23
-0.58
-0.73%
 
XOM
81.54
+0.46
+0.57%
 
GE
29.94
-0.25
-0.83%
 
GS
249.33
+1.98
+0.80%
 
HD
145.3
-0.65
-0.45%
 
INTC
36.51
-0.02
-0.05%
 
IBM
179.4
-1.95
-1.08%
 
JNJ
122.4
-0.33
-0.27%
 
JPM
90.43
+0.1
+0.11%
 
MCD
126.99
-0.72
-0.56%
 
MRK
65.85
-0.31
-0.47%
 
MSFT
64.23
-0.39
-0.60%
 
NKE
57.69
-0.17
-0.29%
 
PFE
34.28
+0.02
+0.06%
 
PG
90.89
-0.16
-0.18%
 
TRV
122.04
-0.23
-0.19%
 
UNH
165.38
+2.32
+1.42%
 
UTX
112.81
+0.35
+0.31%
 
VZ
49.94
-0.66
-1.30%
 
V
88
-0.43
-0.49%
 
WMT
71.74
-0.65
-0.90%
 
DIS
110.23
-0.09
-0.08%
 
  • Risk Management & Loss Prevention
  • E&O Tip
  • E&O Tip
  • Continuing Education
  • Social Media Marketing

Featured Articles

MORE ARTICLES

Insurance Blog

Engineering Firm Gets Soaked By Professional Services Exclusions in Water Treatment Plant Claim

In an unpublished decision, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision judgment in favor of two insurers. Specifically, the Sixth Circuit broadly construed professional services exclusions to preclude coverage. As background, the Village of Dexter in Michigan hired an engineering and architecture firm, Orchard, Hiltz, & McCliment, Inc. (OHM), to oversee the upgrade of a wastewater treatment plant. The project included both the design and construction phases. Notably, Dexter approved three OHM proposals for professional engineering services. In addition,

Read More

A Bad Faith Cautionary Tale: Ninth Circuit Affirms $8.7 Million Award for Bad Faith Coverage Denial

In Millennium Laboratories, Inc. v. Darwin Select Insurance Co., No. 15-55227, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1533 (9th Cir. Jan. 27, 2017), the Ninth Circuit held that Darwin Select Insurance Company breached its duty to defend its insured, Millennium Laboratories, Inc., against two third-party lawsuits (Ameritox and Calloway). The court further held that Darwin’s failure to defend Millennium was in bad faith. As background, Millennium filed a complaint seeking coverage regarding two underlying lawsuits alleging Millennium told its customers that its

Read More

No Duty, No Problem: Seventh Circuit Finds Absence of Duty for Insurance Broker to Non-Client in Connection with Fraudulent Insurance Scheme

The Seventh Circuit recently handed down a decision in which it refused to recognize a negligence claim against an insurance broker which would have expanded the duties of brokers and agents beyond those articulated in the Illinois Insurance Placement Liability Act (IIPLA), 735 ILCS 5/2 2201. In M.G. Skinner & Associates Insurance Agency v. Norman-Spencer Agency, Inc., No. 15-2290, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 63 (7th Cir. Jan. 4, 2017), the Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment

Read More

What’s Yours is Mine and What’s Mine Isn’t Covered: Illinois Federal Court Rejects Coverage for Suit Seeking Restitution

In Westport Insurance Corp. v. M.L. Sullivan Insurance Agency, Inc., No. 15 C 7294, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1527 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 5, 2017), an Illinois federal district court underscored the importance of a policy’s damages requirement when it granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of Westport Insurance Corporation and against its insured M.L. Sullivan Insurance Agency. In the underlying suit, American Inter-Fidelity Exchange (AIFE) alleged Sullivan and one of its employees provided false information about insurance premiums due

Read More

What’s Yours is Mine and What’s Mine Isn’t Covered: Illinois Federal Court Rejects Coverage for Suit Seeking Restitution

In Westport Insurance Corp. v. M.L. Sullivan Insurance Agency, Inc., No. 15 C 7294, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1527 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 5, 2017), an Illinois federal district court underscored the importance of a policy’s damages requirement when it granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of Westport Insurance Corporation and against its insured M.L. Sullivan Insurance Agency. In the underlying suit, American Inter-Fidelity Exchange (AIFE) alleged Sullivan and one of its employees provided false information about insurance premiums due

Read More

A Contract by Any Other Name Would … Still Be a Contract: Wisconsin Court of Appeals Enforces Breach of Contract Exclusions to Preclude Coverage for Business Competition Claim

In Great Lakes Beverages, LLC v. Wochinski (Jan. 18, 2017), the Wisconsin Court of Appeals held that AMCO had no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against the underlying third-party tortious interference with contract claim because the breach of contract exclusions applicable to personal and advertising injury squarely applied. As background, K-Way Systems contracted with Wochinski to purchase his company. The purchase agreement contained an asset purchase agreement, a covenant not to compete, and a supply agreement. Relations between

Read More

Ninth Circuit Confirms the FDIC Cannot Avoid the Insured-Versus-Insured Exclusion

In recent years, courts frequently have held that a D&O policy’s “insured-versus-insured” exclusion bars coverage for claims by the FDIC, as receiver of a failed bank, against the bank’s former directors and officers because the FDIC stands in the shoes of the insured bank. Therefore, the FDIC has tried to circumvent this exclusion by arguing that a policy’s shareholder derivative suit exception to the insured-versus-insured exclusion brought the FDIC’s claim back within coverage. A recent decision by the Ninth Circuit

Read More
MORE BLOG POSTS
learn more
VIEW RATINGS FOR INSURERS
Enter name of Insurance Company and press GO button.