Pa.'s Babcock Decision Is Damaging To The Rule Of Law

Law360, New York (August 13, 2015, 4:21 PM EDT) -- Jason P. Gosselin

Timothy J. O'Driscoll Legal commentators and court watchers rightly complain about activist judges who make laws rather than interpret them. Last month's decision in the The Babcock & Wilcox Co. et al. v. American Nuclear Insurers, et al., is deserving of such criticism. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court fashioned a new and dramatic rule favoring policyholders and harming insurers and it did so while openly disregarding clear policy language.

The dispute in Babcock began in 1994 with a class action lawsuit by plaintiffs claiming bodily injury and property damage. They alleged that their harm resulted from emissions at nuclear...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!