Coverage & Claims

Subscribe to Coverage & Claims via RSS

The California Supreme Court last week handed down a major ruling endorsing the “all-sums-with-stacking” approach for insurance coverage in long-tail environmental claims. …
Read More California Adopts “All-Sums-With-Stacking” Rule in Decision that Maximizes Coverage Available to Policyholders

In JP Morgan Chase & Co. v Indian Harbor Ins. Co., 2012 NY Slip Op 4702 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep’t June 12, 2012), the New York Appellate Division, applying Illinois law, held that an insured was unable to access numerous excess layers due to its failure to show that the exhaustion provisions in the excess policies had been satisfied. …
Read More New York Appellate Division Affirms Lower Court’s Ruling That Excess Insurers Have No Payment Obligations Where The Insured Fails to Satisfy Conditions Precedent to Exhaustion

The New York State Court of Appeals has ruled that additional insureds are not entitled to coverage under a general liability policy if that policy is rescinded due to the named insured’s material misrepresentations. …
Read More New York Court Holds That Additional Insureds Are Not Entitled To GL Coverage Where The Policy Is Rescinded Due To The Named Insured’s Material Misrepresentations

Does an excess liability insurer have standing to bring a malpractice claim against counsel appointed by its insured’s primary carrier to defend against a lawsuit?  In Mississippi, the answer is a qualified, “Yes.” …
Read More Mississippi Appeals Court Recognizes Excess Carrier’s Malpractice Claim Against Insured’s Defense Counsel

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island declared that a claimant lacks the ability to bring an action against an insurer for violation of Rhode Island’s Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act, R.I. Gen. Laws, tit. 27, ch. 9.1 (1956).  The case is Great American E&S Insurance Company v. End Zone Pub & Grill of Narragansett, Inc., No. 2010-375-Appeal. …
Read More Supreme Court of Rhode Island Finds That Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act Does Not Create Private Cause of Action Against Insurers

The Second Circuit recently held that, even if a stock recovers its value after dropping following a corrective disclosure, this does not necessarily negate a showing of loss causation at the pleading stage in a claim for securities fraud.  See Acticon AG, et al. v. China North East Petroleum Holdings Ltd., et al., No. 11-4544-cv (2nd Cir., August 1, 2012).  A copy of the decision is available here. …
Read More Second Circuit Holds That Post-Disclosure Recovery of Stock Price Does Not Negate Loss Causation

In Coles & Ors v Hetherton & Ors [2012] EWHC 1599, Mr Justice Cooke handed down judgment on two preliminary questions related to claims under policies of motor insurance. Cooke J held that: (1) where a vehicle has been damaged, the correct measure of damages is the diminution in value, which is taken to be reasonable cost of repairs; and (2) a tortfeasor cannot rely on any arrangements made by a claimant’s insurer in relation to the car’s repairs, and thus cannot argue that it is the actual cost to the insurer that is to be taken as the measure of loss. …
Read More UK: High Court Considers the Measure and Reasonableness of a Claimant’s Loss

In Aizkir Navigation Inc v Al Wathba National Insurance [2011] EWHC 3940 (Comm), the High Court considered a principle of contractual construction and held that a clause stating that claims “be settled in accordance with English Law and practice shall be so settled in Abu Dhabi (UAE)” amounted to an exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the United Arab Emirates (the UAE) and there was no overwhelming reason to displace that jurisdiction clause. …
Read More UK: The English High Court Finds No Compelling Reason to Displace a UAE Jurisdiction Clause

On 27 June the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the case of Summers v Fairclough Homes Limited [2012] UKSC 26, which gives helpful guidance on the exercise of courts’ jurisdiction to strike out statements of case. …
Read More UK: Supreme Court Preserves Courts’ Jurisdiction to Strike Out Exaggerated Claims During Trial