|
 |
LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Emerging Insurance Disputes Legal News DENVER - An insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify an insured for an underlying legal malpractice suit because the claim against the insured was made before the inception of the policy period, a majority of a 10th Circuit Court of Appeals panel said Nov. 12 (Berry & Murphy P.C., et al. v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co., No. 09-1004, 10th Cir.).
Full story on lexis.com
RICHMOND, Va. - Because a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether it was reasonable for an insured attorney to anticipate the filing of a claim against him by a client, a Virginia federal judge on Nov. 4 denied both the insurer's and the insureds' cross-motions for summary judgment (Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Terrence R. Batzli, et al., No. 09-432, E.D. Va.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102808).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN FRANCISCO - A California hotel's management company and its senior vice president have not raised a genuine issue of material fact that they were named insureds under an insurance policy and, therefore, they are not entitled to a declaratory judgment that the insurer was required to provide them notice of cancellation of the policy, a California federal judge held Nov. 6, granting summary judgment to the insurer on counterclaims for declaratory relief and bad faith (Riverport Insurance Co. v. Oakland Community Housing Inc., et al., No C 08-3883 VRW, N.D. Calif.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104472).
Full story on lexis.com
MIAMI - An insurer was required to comply with Florida Statutes Section 627.94071 and, therefore, cannot require a home health aide provider's reimbursement for secondary services to be contingent on an insured's use of primary services, a Florida appeals panel found Nov. 12, reversing and remanding a lower court's ruling in favor of the insurer (Bell Care Nurses Registry, Inc. v. Continental Casualty Company d/b/a CNA Insurance Companies, No. 3D08-2226, Fla. App., 3rd Dist.; 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 16837).
Full story on lexis.com
DENVER - An insured is not entitled to coverage for an underlying suit alleging violations of the California Labor Code because California's wage-and-hour provisions are similar to the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the policy excludes coverage for FLSA violations, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Nov. 10 (Payless Shoesource Inc. v. The Travelers Companies Inc., f/n/a The St. Paul Travelers Companies Inc., No. 08-3246,?10th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 24728; See 9/3/08, Page 25).
Full story on lexis.com
PASADENA, Calif. - There is no coverage under a business and management policy for underlying labor law violation claims filed against an insurer because the policy broadly excludes coverage for any lawsuits involving employment-related matters, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Nov. 3, affirming a lower court (Tricor America Inc. v. Illinois Union Insurance Co., No. 08-56075, 9th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 24465).
Full story on lexis.com
NEWARK, N.J. - Because exposure to indoor contaminants, such as mercury, is not traditional environmental pollution as defined by the New Jersey Supreme Court and an insurer's absolute pollution exclusion only precludes coverage for traditional environmental pollution, an insurer's reliance on the exclusion to deny coverage for underlying mercury contamination suits was misplaced, a New Jersey federal judge said Nov. 12 (Becky Baughman, et al. v. United States Liability Insurance Co., No. 08-2901, D. N.J.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106400).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW YORK - An insurer must produce documents pertaining to its policies' pollution exclusion clauses because the insurer raised the pollution exclusion as a defense in response to an insured's complaint seeking coverage for lawsuits arising from an outbreak of Legionnaires' disease on a cruise ship, a New York federal magistrate judge said Nov. 16 (Pentair Water Treatment [OH] Co. v. The Continental Insurance Co., et al., No. 08-3604, S.D. N.Y.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106424; See 08/6/09, Page 23).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN ANTONIO - Because questions of fact exist regarding whether students were infected with tuberculosis as a result of the use of an insured bus whose driver unknowingly had tuberculosis, summary judgment against the insurer must be reversed, the Fifth District Texas Court of Appeals said Nov. 4 (Lancer Insurance Co. v. Oscar Perez II, et al., No. 04-08-839, Texas App., 4th Dist.; 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 8445).
Full story on lexis.com
LOS ANGELES - An underlying trademark infringement action between two food wholesalers involved a claim against the use of words that preceded the insurance policies, a California appeals panel found Nov. 13, affirming a lower court's finding that the policies' prior publication exclusion precludes coverage (Kim Seng Co. v. Great American Insurance Co. of New York, et al., No. B208699, Calif. App.; 2nd Dist., Div. 5; 2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1826).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN FRANCISCO - No coverage exists under the advertising injury provisions of business liability insurance policies because there is no causal connection between the advertising and the underlying allegations of copyright infringement, a California federal judge held Nov. 10, further finding that certain policy exclusions also bar coverage (Hartford Casualty Insurance Company v. EEE Business, et al., No. 09-cv-01888, N.D. Calif.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104994).
Full story on lexis.com
MIAMI - A woman who required a liver transplant after using the energy supplement Up Your Gas won a $4 million declaration on Nov. 9 in a Florida federal court that the policy James River Insurance Co. issued to the manufacturer does not contain a policy date based on occurrence but based on claims made (James River Insurance Company v. Laura Dimauro, et al., No. 08-23235, S.D. Fla., Miami Div.).
Full story on lexis.com
PASADENA, Calif. - A management company's van was being "used to carry persons for a charge" when an alleged injury occurred and, therefore, coverage for the injury is precluded by an automobile insurance policy's exclusion, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held Nov. 16, affirming a lower court (Clarendon National Insurance Co. v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co., et al., No. 08-55924, 9th Cir.).
Full story on lexis.com
HARTFORD, Conn. - An insurer owes no coverage for an underlying lawsuit stemming from an insured's attack on an individual because the policy specifically excludes coverage for physical abuse regardless of the abuser's intent, the Connecticut Court of Appeals said Nov. 3 (Merrimack Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Jerry Ramsey et al., No. AC 30245, Conn. App.; 2009 Conn. App. LEXIS 472).
Full story on lexis.com
BOSTON - A federal judge's finding that removal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) does not attach if the complaint does not specifically define the putative class was premature, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 22 (College of Dental Surgeons of Puerto Rico v. Connecticut General Life Insurance Company, et al., No. 09-2201, 1st Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 23299).
Full story on lexis.com
[Editor's Note: The following items of interest appeared recently on the LexisNexis Insurance Law Center. Devoted to insurance litigation and the insurance industry, the Insurance Law Center is where you can connect with other insurance professionals to discuss the hottest issues. Become a regular contributor. Visit the center on the open Web for insurance-related headlines, discussion, expert commentary and more at: http://law.lexisnexis.com/practiceareas/insurance.]
Full story on lexis.com
AUSTIN, Texas - Interpreting a known-falsity exclusion to preclude coverage for an underlying defamation lawsuit against an insured corporation, the Texas Supreme Court on Oct. 30 found that the insured's knowledge is not limited to what its officers know but may include other employees' knowledge (Chrysler Insurance Co. v. Greenspoint Dodge of Houston Inc., No. 08-0780, Texas Sup.; 2009 Tex. LEXIS 874).
Full story on lexis.com
ALBANY, NY - Applying Pennsylvania law, the New York Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 20 that prior knowledge exclusions bar any duty to indemnify on the part of excess insurers with regard to professional malpractice actions against a law firm and one of its attorneys (Executive Risk Indemnity Inc. v. Pepper Hamilton LLP, et al. and Pepper Hamilton LLP, et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., et al., No. 130, N.Y. App.; 2009 N.Y. LEXIS 3911).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW ORLEANS - An insurer has a duty to defend an alternate employer named in an underlying lawsuit because the policy's alternate employers endorsement is ambiguous when read in conjunction with the policy's protection and indemnity exclusion, a Louisiana federal judge said Oct. 29 (Cal Dive International Inc., et al. v. Seabright Insurance Co., No. 08-4279, E.D. La.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100691).
Full story on lexis.com
MINNEAPOLIS - An insurance company has no duty to defend or indemnify underlying claims of irregular billing charges involving an insured's mobile content, a Minnesota federal judge ruled Oct. 20, granting summary judgment to the insurer (W3i Mobile LLC v. Westchester Fire Insurance Co., No. 08-6370, D. Minn.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98061).
Full story on lexis.com
LINCOLN, Neb. - An insurer had no obligation under its duty to defend an insured to post a supersedeas bond on a judgment exceeding the remaining policy limits, the Nebraska Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 20 (Hedy Wiegert-Stathes, personal representative of the estate of Erich Wiegert v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co., No. A-08-1041, Neb. App.; 2009 Neb. App. LEXIS 179).
Full story on lexis.com
DENVER - A prior knowledge exclusion precludes an excess directors and officers (D&O) liability insurer from any obligation to pay an additional $2.5 million in defense costs for allegations of a fraudulent scheme, the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 26 (Louis E. Rivelli, et al. v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co., No. 08-1480, 10th Cir.).
Full story on lexis.com
PHILADELPHIA - An asset purchase agreement does not obligate Hartford Fire Insurance Co. to step into the shoes of an insolvent insurer and provide coverage to a former G-I Holdings Inc. officer who is a defendant in three fraudulent conveyance lawsuits, the Third Circuit U.S Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 26 (G-I Holdings Inc., et al. v. Reliance Insurance Co., et al., No. 07-2510, 3rd Cir.; See 4/4/07, Page 6).
Full story on lexis.com
MADISON, Wis. - Because an underlying lawsuit alleges wrongful termination, the only exception to a policy's insured vs. insured exclusion, a directors and officers (D&O) insurer owes coverage for the underlying suit, a Wisconsin federal judge said Oct. 20 in denying the insurer's motion for summary judgment (Link Snacks Inc., et al. v. Federal Insurance Co., No 08-714, W.D. Wisc.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97175).
Full story on lexis.com
BOWLING GREEN, Ky. - No coverage is afforded under a directors and officers (D&O) insurance policy for underlying lawsuits filed against an insured because the policy's bodily injury and failure to maintain insurance exclusions apply to bar coverage, a Kentucky federal judge said Oct. 16 (Lifeline Health Group Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Co.,?No. 1:07-CV-00152, W.D. Ken.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97845).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN FRANCISCO - A common claim endorsement that applies when interrelated wrongful acts fall under both the fiduciary and the directors and officers (D&O) coverage sections of an insurance policy acts to limit a shareholder's contract damages, an Oregon federal magistrate judge said Oct. 15 (Alexander Manufacturing Ins. Employee Stock Ownership Plan and Trust v. Illinois Union Insurance Co., No. 06-735, D. Ore.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95897; See 4/1/09, Page 5).
Full story on lexis.com
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - A "tangible property" exclusion bars coverage for damage arising out of water infiltration of a building, a Florida federal judge ruled Oct. 14, finding that a directors and officers (D&O) insurer has no duty to defend (Eastpointe Condominium I Association Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Company of America, No. 08-81187, S.D. Fla.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95720).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN FRANCISCO - An error and omissions (E&O) insurer had no duty to provide Cumis counsel for an insurance broker's defense in an arbitration proceeding, and the insurer did not act in bad faith, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 27 (Sovereign General Insurance Services Inc. v. National Casualty Co., No. 08-16306, 9th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 23686).
Full story on lexis.com
WILMINGTON, Del. - Two insurers have a duty to indemnify an insured's settlement of allegations for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (ICFA), a Delaware magistrate judge recommended Oct. 26 (New Century Mortgage Corp. v. Great Northern Insurance Co. and Federal Insurance Co., No. 07-640, D. Del.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 100033).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW YORK - The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 19 upheld a federal judge's ruling that a communications liability insurance policy is ambiguous as to whether $1 million or $10 million in coverage is provided for two underlying copyright infringement lawsuits. A jury later found the coverage limits to be $10 million (Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. The Thomson Corp., No. 08-1719, 2nd Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 23075; See 2/6/08, Page 6).
Full story on lexis.com
CHICAGO - A prior policy exclusion applies to bar coverage for an underlying malpractice claim because the claim occurred during the prior insurer's policy period and nothing in the exclusion limits the time frame within which a claim under a prior policy must be reported for the exclusion to apply, the Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 28 in reversing (James River Insurance Co. v. Kemper Casualty Insurance Co., No. 08-3570, 7th Cir.; See 11/3/08, Page 17).
Full story on lexis.com
SPOKANE, Wash. - A Washington federal judge on Oct. 23 denied an insurer's motion for reconsideration, determining that the professional liability insurer failed to show actual prejudice by the insured's late notice of a potential malpractice claim (Westport Insurance Corp. v. The Markham Group Inc., et al., No. CV-08-221-RHW, E.D. Wash.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98859; See 9/3/09, Page 14).
Full story on lexis.com
LOS ANGELES - A California federal judge refused on Oct. 20 to dismiss a contractor's direct action against a professional liability insurer regarding coverage for a default judgment against an insured for negligence in surveying and engineering services on a construction project (AMCAL General Contractors Inc. v. ACE American Insurance Co., No. 09-06134, C.D. Calif.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97111).
Full story on lexis.com
PARKERSBURG, W. Va. - Knowingly permitting an underage adult to consume alcoholic beverages on an insured homeowner's property is not an occurrence; therefore, an insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify the insured in an underlying suit, a West Virginia federal judge said Oct. 22 (American Modern Home Insurance Co. v. Jeff Corra, et al., No. 06-01015, S.D. W. Va.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98533; See 1/7/09, Page 15).
Full story on lexis.com
TULSA, Okla. - A homeowners insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify its insured against a minor child's parents' claims that the insured's negligence resulted in their child's molestation because the claim was excluded under the policy's molestation and intentional acts exclusions, a federal judge in Oklahoma ruled Oct. 20 in granting the insurer's motion for summary judgment (Farmers Alliance Mutual Insurance Company v. Edward Willingham, Jr., et al., No. 08-CV-0532-CVE-FHM, N.D. Okla.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98482).
Full story on lexis.com
RICHMOND, Va. - A federal judge in Virginia on Oct. 20 stayed an insurers' declaratory judgment action that sought to resolve insurance coverage disputes related to an underlying state court tort action that was pending, finding that there was "a clear potential for entanglement" between the two actions (Auto-Owners Insurance Company, et al. v. Donald W. Waters, et al., No. 3:09CV134-HEH, E.D. Va.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96993).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW ORLEANS - A District Court did not err in failing to submit an allocation issue to a jury because a jury would have reached the same conclusion as the District Court regarding allocation of a settlement of an employers liability claim, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 15 (Cooper Industries LLC, et al. v. American International Specialty Lines Insurance Co., No. 09-20112, 5th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22709; See 4/16/08, Page 10).
Full story on lexis.com
ATLANTA - Because Georgia law is not clear as to what constitutes an adequate showing of prejudice, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 30 certified three questions to the Georgia Supreme Court pertaining to an insurer's reservation of rights and withdrawal of counsel (World Harvest Church Inc. v. GuideOne Mutual Insurance Co.,?No. 08-17258, 11th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 23944).
Full story on lexis.com
[Editor's Note: The following items of interest appeared recently on the LexisNexis Insurance Law Center. Devoted to insurance litigation and the insurance industry, the Insurance Law Center is where you can connect with other insurance professionals to discuss the hottest issues. Become a regular contributor. Visit the center on the open Web for insurance-related headlines, discussion, expert commentary and more at: http://law.lexisnexis.com/practiceareas/insurance.]
Full story on lexis.com
BOSTON - No coverage is owed under a directors and officers (D&O) policy for the settlement of an underlying disability discrimination lawsuit because the underlying suit did not name any specific directors or officers, only the company itself, the First Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Oct. 8 (Medical Mutual Insurance Company of Maine v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., No. 08-2525, 1st Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22223; See 12/3/2008, Page 6).
Full story on lexis.com
SIOUX CITY, Iowa - In a Sept. 30 order, a federal judge in Iowa denied a motion to dismiss by an insurer that was arguing that it did not have a duty to defend and indemnify a company under its directors and officers (D&O) liability insurance policy in prior litigation brought by a shareholder (Harker's Distribution, Inc. v. Federal Insurance Company, et al., No. 08-CV-4105, N.D. Iowa.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90820).
Full story on lexis.com
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico - An insurer has no duty to defend the medical director of a laser vision clinic because the policy at issue clearly precludes coverage for services furnished by health care providers, a Puerto Rico federal judge said Oct. 9 (Ruben E. Alayon DelValle v. Dr. Kenneth Kenyon, et al., No. 06-2105, D. Puerto Rico; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94477).
Full story on lexis.com
LOS ANGELES - Professional liability insurers have no duty to indemnify an insured who was sued for legal malpractice because the insured failed to obtain the insurers' consent before settling the underlying malpractice suit, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge said Oct. 1 (Safeco Insurance Company of America v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyds London, No. BC378070, Calif. Super., Los Angeles Co.).
Full story on lexis.com
FORT MYERS, Fla. - A federal judge in Florida on Oct. 2 denied a title company's motion to dismiss a professional liability insurer's request for a declaration that it owes no duty to the title company in a pending state case, holding that the state case has different parties and will address different questions than the federal case (Landmark American Insurance Company v. Reli Title, Inc., et al., No. 08-cv-00875, M.D. Fla.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91835).
Full story on lexis.com
SPARTANBURG, S.C. - Because the extent and limits of coverage under an insured's policy and the payment of the coverage limits were previously litigated, a professional liability insurer's claim for reimbursement and equitable subrogation is barred by the doctrine of res judicata, a South Carolina federal judge said Oct. 1 (Pharmacists Mutual Insurance Co. v. Cincinnati Insurance Co., No. 08-3631, D. S.C.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91534).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on Sept. 30 dismissed the rescission actions brought by the professional liability insurers of Milberg LLP, concluding that the actions were barred by the applicable statute of limitations and that the running of the statutory limitations was not tolled pending resolution of the underlying allegations (Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, et al. v. Milberg LLP, et al., No. 08 Civ. 7522 [LAP], S.D. N.Y.).
Full story on lexis.com
HAMMOND, Ind. - A medical malpractice insurer has no obligation to contribute to pharmacists' defense in an underlying action; however, its policy requires that any judgment against the pharmacists be divided between the insurer and a second medical malpractice insurer pro rata, an Indiana federal judge found Sept. 30 (Chicago Insurance Co. v. The Hills Insurance Co., No. 07-00106, N.D. Ind.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91068).
Full story on lexis.com
NEW YORK - Because an insurer failed to prove that allegations of sexually harassment and abuse do not constitute an occurrence as defined in its policy and did not arise out of the scope of employment, a New York justice on Oct. 8 refused to granted the insurer's motion to dismiss a third-party complaint filed against it by its insured (Miguelina Nunez, et al. v. Mariners Temple Baptist Church, et al., No. 103308/07, N.Y. Sup., New York Co.; 2009 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2764).
Full story on lexis.com
SCRANTON, Pa. - Because a driver's injuries from a thrown rock arose from a third party's intervening act, a Pennsylvania federal judge on Sept. 30 ruled that the driver's insurer was not obligated to pay him wage loss benefits under his auto insurance policy (Terry McCleester v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., No. 3:08-cv-0010, M.D. Pa.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90345).
Full story on lexis.com
ATLANTA - An insured is entitled to recover only the maximum limit for one policy period because the crime insurance policy was a claims-made policy and not an occurrence-based policy, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said Oct. 1 (PBSJ Corp. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 08-15533, 11th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 21699).
Full story on lexis.com
MEMPHIS, Tenn. - Funds stolen by an employee from the personal bank account of a business owner do not fall within the ownership provision of a crime coverage policy, a federal judge in Tennessee ruled Sept. 30 (Loeb Properties Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 2:08-cv-2093-JPM-cmc, W.D. Tenn, Western Div.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90435).
Full story on lexis.com
CHICAGO - A federal judge on Sept. 30 rejected a summary judgment motion after finding that an employer's theft recovery insurance claims are not time-barred or precluded under a unicover insurance policy (Taylor Chrysler Dodge Inc. v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Co., No. 08-C-4522, N.D. Ill.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91187).
Full story on lexis.com
PHOENIX - An insured and its insurer on Sept. 25 filed a notice of settlement in principle following an Arizona federal judge's ruling that a "loss sustained during prior insurance" (LSDPI) provision and a "cancellation as to any employee" (CATAE) provision do not preclude coverage for the insured's loss resulting from the dishonest acts of its former employee (Eaglepitcher Management Company v. Zurich American Insurance Company, No. CV 04-970-PHX-MHM, D. Ariz.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68360).
Full story on lexis.com
DETROIT - A federal judge in Michigan on Sept. 28 denied in part a company's motion for summary judgment, holding that even though a number of parties were involved in a $4.6 million embezzlement scheme, the loss was a single occurrence under a certain commercial crime insurance policy and as a single occurrence was covered for only $1 million (Hartman and Tyner, Incorporated v. Federal Insurance Company, Incorporated, No. 08-cv-12461, E.D. Mich.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90004).
Full story on lexis.com
PHILADELPHIA - Finding "no ambiguities" in an insurance policy's exclusion of coverage for "services or products not approved" by a financial planner's broker/dealer, a panel in the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 8 found that the insurer did not act in bad faith in denying coverage for negligence and breach of contract claims brought against the planner by his former clients (Stacey Smith, et al. v. Continental Casualty Co., No. 08-4140, 3rd Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22240).
Full story on lexis.com
DENVER - A judgment was issued on Sept. 30 in accordance with a federal judge in Colorado's Sept. 29 order granting summary judgment to an insurer because a group of insureds and their insurance agent had not notified the insurer within the effective policy period of an errors and omissions liability policy and therefore were not entitled to coverage of their claims (American Automobile Insurance Company v. Dennis Marlow, et al., No 07-cv-02180, D. Colo.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90161).
Full story on lexis.com
BRIDGEPORT, Conn. - A dispute over insurance coverage stemming from a deadly 1999 nursing home boiler-room explosion is headed for trial after a federal judge refused to grant summary judgment motions on Sept. 30 (HSB Group, Inc. v. SVB Underwriting, Ltd., No. 3:04cv2127, D. Conn.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90723).
Full story on lexis.com
SCRANTON, Pa. - A Pennsylvania federal judge on Sept. 30 ruled that an insurance company has no duty to indemnify a mortgage broker in six lawsuits based on the clear wording of the broker's errors and omissions policies (Nations First Mortgage, LLC, et al. v. Tudor Insurance Company, No. 05-2527, M.D. Pa.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90343).
Full story on lexis.com
TACOMA, Wash. - An insured is not entitled to coverage under claims made and reported policies because the insured failed to provide notice "as soon as practicable" as required by the policies, and the "notice-prejudice" rule does not apply to claims made and reported policies, a Washington federal judge said Oct. 2 (Manufactured Housing Communities of Washington v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Co., No. 09-5088, W.D. Wash.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92081).
Full story on lexis.com
HAMMOND, Ind. - An Indiana federal judge on Sept. 30 ruled that an insurer had to answer interrogatories filed by a couple seeking an explanation for the denial of coverage in an underlying lawsuit alleging child molestation when the insurer had defended a similar action previously (State Farm Fire and Casualty Company v. Donald E. Nokes Jr., et al., No. 08-312, N.D. Ind.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91026).
Full story on lexis.com
CINCINNATI - The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct 7 vacated and remanded an award of summary judgment against an insurance company on counsel rates and bankruptcy fees; however, it affirmed the award of 12 percent penalty interest (Alticor Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa., No. 08-2254, 6th Cir.; 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 22298).
Full story on lexis.com
SCRANTON, Pa. - A Pennsylvania federal judge on Sept. 29 refused to reconsider his decision granting partial summary judgment to an insurer regarding its duty to pay attorney fees, costs or expenses for an underlying civil rights lawsuit (Scottsdale Insurance Co. v. The City of Hazleton, et al., No. 07-01704, M.D. Pa.; 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90029).
Full story on lexis.com
|