• Risk Management & Loss Prevention
  • E&O Tip
  • E&O Tip
  • Continuing Education
  • Social Media Marketing

Featured Articles

MORE ARTICLES

Insurance Blog

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Insurers Not Responsible for Charging Liens

The Ohio Supreme Court held that an insurer who settles a personal injury claim with an accident victim has no duty to issue payment directly to the victim’s former lawyer pursuant to a charging lien.[1] In the underlying personal injury matter, an automobile accident victim hired a law firm to represent him. The victim and his law firm entered into a contract that granted the law firm a charging lien on the proceeds of any insurance payment, settlement, judgment, or

Read More

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Insurers Not Responsible for Charging Liens

The Ohio Supreme Court held that an insurer who settles a personal injury claim with an accident victim has no duty to issue payment directly to the victim’s former lawyer pursuant to a charging lien.[1] In the underlying personal injury matter, an automobile accident victim hired a law firm to represent him. The victim and his law firm entered into a contract that granted the law firm a charging lien on the proceeds of any insurance payment, settlement, judgment, or

Read More

Texas Supreme Court Hears Argument on Whether to Adopt Exception to Eight-Corner Rule

At oral argument in the case of State Farm Lloyds v. Janet Richards,[1] the Texas Supreme Court heard from both sides on whether or not Texas courts should recognize a policy-language based exception to the eight-corners rule, applied when evaluating whether an insurer can introduce extrinsic evidence to contest its duty to defend the insured for a third-party liability claim. The so-called eight-corners rule allows a court to refer only to the relevant policy terms and factual allegations in the

Read More

NY Appellate Court Confirms an Absence of Negligence is no Roadblock to AI Coverage

New York’s Appellate Division, First Department, handed insurers a lump of coal this holiday season, unanimously holding that a contractor’s insurance company (Insurer) owed a property owner and manager (Building Defendants) primary coverage as additional insureds, even though its named insured had nothing to do with the allegedly negligent acts giving rise to the subject injury, and despite the named insured previously prevailing against the Building Defendants’ claims for common law and contractual indemnification. As the First Department panel concluded,

Read More

Failure to Issue a Reservation of Rights, and to Address an Insured’s Affirmative Defenses in a Coverage Dispute, May Preclude Denial of an Otherwise Excluded Claim

A recent Florida state court opinion emphasizes the importance of an insurer’s obligations in the event of a liability claim against an insured and a subsequent coverage dispute with that insured. In Hurchalla v. Homeowners Choice Property & Casualty Insurance Company, the insured was sued for tortious interference with business contracts. Although her liability policy did not insure against intentional acts, the insurer initially provided the insured with a defense. However, the insurer neglected to inform the insured that the

Read More

Depositing Policy Limits Does Not End the Duty to Defend

An Oregon federal court revisited a common coverage question that comes up from time to time: When indemnity for a loss is reasonably clear, can an insurer limit its defense expense exposure by simply depositing the policy limits with the court? The answer, according to this court, and most other courts around the country, is no.[1] The liability policy in U.S. Fire Ins. V. Mother Earth School contained the commonly-found insuring agreement language which provides, in relevant part, that an

Read More

Insurers Be Ready: New Jersey’s Two-Year Window Reviving Time-Barred Sex Abuse Suits is Open

On December 1, 2019, the two-year look-back period created by New Jersey Senate Measure S477 went into effect, reviving claims of sexual abuse that would otherwise be barred under the statute of limitations. In March 2019, S477 passed in the New Jersey State Senate by a vote of 32 to 1, followed by passage in the New Jersey State Assembly by a vote of 71-0, with five abstentions. The bill was signed into law by New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy

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