Coverage & Claims

Subscribe to Coverage & Claims via RSS

n Oxford Health Plans LLC v. Sutter, 569 U.S. ____ (2013), the Supreme Court all but ordered the federal courts to not decide whether one person can pursue arbitration on behalf of a class of other people. Dr. John Sutter had a contract with Oxford Health Plans to provide his services to people Oxford insured. In exchange, Oxford would pay him. …
Read More The Supreme Court Rules that Courts Must Honor an Arbitrator’s Construction of Contractual Language in Favor of Class Arbitration, “However Good, Bad, or Ugly”

A liability insurer found to have “breached its duty to defend…may not later rely on policy exclusions to escape its duty to indemnify the insured for a judgment against him.” This is the latest pronouncement from the New York Court of Appeals in K2 Inv. Group, et al. v. Am. Guar. & Liab. Ins. Co., No 106 (June 11, 2013). A copy of the opinion is available here. …
Read More Caution to Insurers – New Duty to Defend Opinion Issued by New York’s High Court

On June 11, 2013, the New York State Court of Appeals reinstated a policyholder’s claim for coverage for a $160 million “disgorgement” payment to the SEC. The decision, J.P. Morgan Securities v. Vigilant Insurance, No. 113 (June 11, 2013), is available here. …
Read More New York’s Highest Court Delivers Important Disgorgement Decision

The DRI Bad Faith conference concluded on Thursday afternoon with a presentation by Sarah M. Thorpe of Gordon & Rees LLP and Donald M. Carley of State Farm Insurance. The panel began with a discussion of the latest developments in strategies for defending bad faith claims. The panel observed that, when faced with an actual or potential bad faith case, counsel is advised to know the facts of the case by reviewing the claims file, interviewing key witnesses, identifying the undisputed and disputed issues, and reviewing the relevant case law.
Read More Live Blog: DRI Insurance Bad Faith & Extra Contractual Liability Conference (Boston): Thursday Late Afternoon Panel

In Osbourne Renfrow v. Redwood Fire and Casualty Ins. Co., et al., 288 F.R.D. 514 (D. Nev. 2013), the U.S. District Court, District of Nevada recently denied an insurer’s motion to bifurcate breach of contract and bad faith claims into two separate proceedings. The court ruling arose out of an underinsured motorist (UIM) claim involving Plaintiff Osbourne Renfrow, who was involved in an accident with an underinsured motorist, causing injuries to Renfrow’s neck, back and shoulders. …
Read More Court Denies Insurer’s Motion to Bifurcate Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Claims

On May 29, 2013, Property Claims Services (“PCS”) released its third re-survey of Superstorm Sandy insurance industry loss estimates based on information gathered from affected insurers. The updated loss estimate was $18.75 billion, which remains unchanged from PCS’s first and second re-survey loss estimates released in January and March 2013, respectively. PCS’s first loss estimate related to Superstorm Sandy, released in November 2012, was $11 billion. …
Read More Industry Loss Estimates for Superstorm Sandy Remain at $18.75 Billion

On the evening of May 23, a large section of the I-5 bridge over the Skagit River in Mt. Vernon, Washington collapsed into the river below. See news articles here and here. According to early reports, an “oversized” truck struck one of the overhead steel trusses on the bridge, which caused the entire structure to fail.
Read More I-5 Bridge Collapse Could Raise Several Thorny Insurance Issues

Program:

Insurance Linked Securities: The Convergence of Insurance and the Capital Markets

Discussion of the legal and regulatory issues for various ILS structures including CAT Bonds, ILW’s and Side Cars.

Read More PLEASE JOIN US – 12th Annual Half-Day Insurance and Reinsurance Seminar – Complimentary Seminar

On Monday, Southern District of New York Judge Shira Scheindlin dismissed the entire suit in Gusinsky v. Barclays, without leave to amend and with prejudice. The plaintiffs, holders of American Depository Shares in Barclays Bank, had brought claims under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the ’34 Act against Barclays, and Section 20(a) control person liability claims against individual directors of the bank for the bank’s role in the manipulation of LIBOR. …
Read More With Securities Case Dismissal, Another Loss in the Southern District for LIBOR Plaintiffs