Posts from May 2017.

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On May 23, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall notice related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Sportex Recalls Salt Rock Lamps Due to Shock and Fire Hazards.Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. The CPSC recently announced the following recall notices related to products that present fire hazards:

Carrier and Bryant Recall Heat Pumps Due to Fire Hazard

Night Lights Recalled by AM Conservation Group Due to Fire Hazard.Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On May 12, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire spread hazard:

Honeywell International Recalls SWIFT® Wireless Gateway Sold with Fire Alarm Systems Due To Failure to Communicate in Fire.Continue Reading

For subrogation professionals, it is important to limit the liability exposure of your insured. In cases where the insurer, as subrogee, is proceeding as the plaintiff, this means limiting any direct claims against the insured – whether for contribution or indemnity – to affirmative defenses as opposed to third-party claims. Limiting direct claims against insureds not only keeps captions clean, but avoids strategic maneuvering by the defense that could negatively impact your case. In Ohio, when a defendant tries to pursue direct claims against the insured for contribution or indemnification, practitioners should, consistent with the analysis set forth in Continental Casualty Company v. Equity Indus. Maple Heights, LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54440 (N.D. Ohio, April 10, 2017), argue that defendants can no longer attempt this maneuver and that they are limited to raising affirmative defenses against the plaintiff’s subrogor.Continue Reading

In subrogation cases where the insured’s damages were caused by a defective product, the fact that the product at issue is or was subject to a recall announced by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) may help to establish that the product was defective when it left the manufacturer’s possession and control. On May 5, 2017, the CPSC announced the following recall related to a product that presents a fire hazard:

Springs Window Fashions Recalls Lithium Batteries Sold with Motorized Window Coverings Due to Fire and Burn Hazards.Continue Reading

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Calendar Event Calendar

Subscribe

Jump to Page

By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.