Eleventh Circuit Holds that Referencing Sealed Documents Is Not Proper Notice
The Eleventh Circuit upheld a win for the insurer under a claims-made-and-reported policy in Crowley Mar. Corp. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA, No. 18-10953, 2019Eleventh Circuit Holds Unlicensed Professional Was Not Engaging In “Professional Servicesâ€
The courts frequently apply insuring agreements broadly. However, in a recent decision, a court narrowly applied the definition of “professional services†to restrict coverage. SpecificalEleventh Circuit: When an Insurer Has a Duty to Defend, Its Duty to Indemnify Is Not Ripe Until Resolution of the Underlying Lawsuit
With limited exception, an insurer that owes a duty to defend to its insured cannot litigate whether it also has a duty to indemnify the insured for the same matter until after the insured’s lExcess Coverage Means Excess Coverage, Unless it Doesn’t: Texas Court Holds Umbrella Policy is Excess over a Primary Policy that is “Excess by Coincidenceâ€
Not all excess coverage is created equal. Some excess coverage is true excess coverage of last resort. But other times, excess coverage is not. For example, a Texas Federal Court recently ruled that aExcess Coverage Means Excess Coverage, Unless it Doesn’t: Texas Court Holds Umbrella Policy is Excess over a Primary Policy that is “Excess by Coincidenceâ€
Not all excess coverage is created equal. Some excess coverage is true excess coverage of last resort. But other times, excess coverage is not. For example, a Texas Federal Court recently ruled that aEnough is Enough: Fifth Circuit Holds Duty to Defend Does Not Include Costs of Prosecuting Insured’s Fee-Dispute Counterclaim
Aldous v. Darwin National Assurance Co., No. 16-10537 (5th Cir. Mar. 16, 2017), presents a thicket of coverage issues. However, the clearest and most significant one for the insurance industry is thatEnough is Enough: Fifth Circuit Holds Duty to Defend Does Not Include Costs of Prosecuting Insured’s Fee-Dispute Counterclaim
Aldous v. Darwin National Assurance Co., No. 16-10537 (5th Cir. Mar. 16, 2017), presents a thicket of coverage issues. However, the clearest and most significant one for the insurance industry is thatELANY Publishes Practical Tips on Applying New York’s New Cybersecurity Regulation to “Unique Situationsâ€
There has been a lot of commentary on New York’s new regulation entitled Cybersecurity Requirements for Financial Services Companies (23 NYCRR 500) (the Regulation) which went into effect on MaEngineering 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 exclusEU and U.S. Negotiators Reach Covered Agreement
On January 13, 2017, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and former U.S Trade Representative Michael Froman notified Congressional leaders that U.S. negotiators reached a covered agreement with EEPA Inquiries Under CERCLA Trigger the Duty to Defend . . . To The End
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the unique liability regime of CERCLA qualifies a request for information under the statutory scheme as a “suit†within the meaning of geneExcess Insurance Does Not Drop Down When Primary Goes Belly Up
Insolvency of a primary insurer represents a tremendous cause for concern for the next layer of excess and umbrella insurers. The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued an important and favorabEmployee’s Equitable Interest in Boss’s Life Insurance Policy Trumps Boss’s Ability to Designate Wife as Beneficiary
In Shuttle v. Ligor (Mass. App. Ct., Nov. 20, 2015) the Massachusetts Court of Appeals held an employer was equitably estopped from changing the beneficiary of his life insurance policy from his emEmployee’s Equitable Interest in Boss’s Life Insurance Policy Trumps Boss’s Ability to Designate Wife as Beneficiary
In Shuttle v. Ligor (Mass. App. Ct., Nov. 20, 2015) the Massachusetts Court of Appeals held an employer was equitably estopped from changing the beneficiary of his life insurance policy from his emEquity Trumps “Love.†And Designated Beneficiaries. With ERISA’s Blessing. Court Imposes Constructive Trust on Life Insurance Proceeds and Insurer Triumphs Through Interpleader
In McCarthy v. Estate of McCarthy, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153107 (SDNY, November 10, 2015), a federal judge imposed a constructive trust on the proceeds of a life insurance policy in favor of the decedExceptionally Navigating Abstention: Northern District of Illinois Applies the Colorado River Doctrine to Stay Arbitration
An insurer and a policyholder entered into an agreement, or didn’t they? Either way, the Northern District of Illinois doesn’t have to decide because “exceptional circumstancesâExceptionally Navigating Abstention: Northern District of Illinois Applies the Colorado River Doctrine to Stay Arbitration
An insurer and a policyholder entered into an agreement, or didn’t they? Either way, the Northern District of Illinois doesn’t have to decide because “exceptional circumstancesâEmotions Set Aside: Widow Denied Husband’s Life Insurance Benefits For Failure to Report Change in Health After Application
The case of Yafei Huang v. Life Insurance Co. of North America, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit dealt with the denial of life insurance benefits — and is a strong reminder tEntrust Me, Man: Landlord’s Due Diligence in Screening Tenant Results in Application of “Entrustment Exclusion†For First-Party Claim Arising Out Of Marijuana Operation
In United States Specialty Insurance Co. v. Barry Inn Realty, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119450 (SDNY September 8, 2015), a federal judge for the Southern District of New York granted a commercial prMeet The Experts
Review articles and blog posts by our list of insurance experts!
Click Here For Participating Firms
VIEW RATINGS FOR INSURERS
Enter name of Insurance Company and press GO button.