CLAIMS-MADE COVERAGE
Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. Syngenta Crop Prot. LLC, 2024 Del. LEXIS 68 (Del. Feb. 26, 2024)
Delaware Supreme Court concludes that a letter from a lawyer informing an insured of possible lawsuits without identifying potential plaintiffs or demanding payment is not a “claim for damages” within the meaning of claims-made CGL and umbrella liability policies. Citing case law from Delaware and other jurisdictions, it reasoned that, in the ordinary sense, a “claim for damages” (which the policies did not define) is “a demand or request for monetary relief by ... Continue Reading
CONTRIBUTION
Chem. Solvents, Inc. v. Greenwich Ins. Co., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 868 (6th Cir. Jan. 13, 2023)
A divided Sixth Circuit panel holds that, under Ohio’s “all sums” allocation scheme, “targeted” insurers may seek indemnity contribution from a policy reinsured by a captive insurer. The court rejected the insured’s argument that allowing contribution from a captive it partly owned would undermine the purpose of “all sums,” and explained that “[a]ll sums shifts the burden of calculating relative liability, but it doesn’t absolve the insured of all ... Continue Reading
ANTI-ASSIGNMENT CLAUSE
Wisconsin Court of Appeals (in a divided decision) holds that a “post-loss” assignment of rights under a liability insurance policy is valid despite lack of insurer consent. The majority believed an insurer’s consent to an assignment after “loss” occurs is not required on the basis that the assignment does not increase the insurer’s risk. It referred to Wisconsin’s “longstanding rule” that an anti-assignment clause in an ... Continue Reading
To Our Readers:
In just a matter of days, we have seen the coronavirus (COVID-19) take off and dominate nearly every aspect of our lives. Reports of serious personal, economic and other impacts that have now become commonplace were unimaginable to most just a few weeks ago. Please know that our thoughts are with you all in this challenging and uncertain time. A time when business is anything but “as usual.”Continue Reading
Recent Posts
Tags
- Pollution Exclusion
- CGL
- Duty to Defend
- New Jersey
- Alaska Supreme Court
- Climate change
- Fourth Circuit
- Hawaii Supreme Court
- New York
- Ohio Supreme Court
- United States Supreme Court
- First Circuit
- Excess Liability
- California
- Texas
- Construction Defects
- Insurance Coverage
- Privilege
- PFAS
- Four Corners Rule
- Ohio
- Delaware
- Settlement
- Massachusetts
- Connecticut
- Opiods
- Firth Circuit
- Hostile Warlike Action
- Illinois
- Mississippi
- Pennsylvania
- Pollution
- Reinsurance
- Third Circuit
- Contribution
- Georgia
- Kentucky
- Limitation of Liability
- Rhode Island
- New Hampshire
- Asbestos
- Environmental
- homeowners policy
- imminent covered loss
- Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
- Liability coverage
- Massachusetts' Consumer Protection Act
- Post-loss
- Sixth Circuit
- Stub periods
- Wisconsin
- Colorado
- Court of Special Appeals
- Eighth Circ
- Eighth Circuit
- Maryland
- Nevada
- Recission Settlement Agreement
- South Dakota
- Utah
- American Law Institute
- Law of Liability Insurance
- Equitable Subrogation
- Florida
- The Restatement (Third) of the Law Governing Lawyers
- Third Party Beneficiary
- Tripartite Relationship Theory
- Appellate
- COVID-19
- Declatory Judgment
- U.S. Congress
- Bad Faith
- Consumer Protection Act
- Made Whole
- Malpractice
- Public Policy
- Reimbursement
Authors
- John S. Anooshian
- Alison Bennett
- Adam M. Berardi
- Paul A. Briganti
- Barbara S. Carra
- Robert Drummond
- David E. Edwards
- Elizabeth L. Ferguson
- R. Victoria Fuller
- Lynndon K. Groff
- Eric B. Hermanson
- Jeremy J. Koepf
- Morgan Liptak
- Gregory T. LoCasale
- Gianna Martorano
- Austin D. Moody
- Frank J. Perch, III
- Victoria M. Ranieri
- Laura Rossi
- Brendaliz Minaya Ruiz
- Patricia B. Santelle
- Robert F. Walsh