General Liability

Expert Analysis

• NY Ruling Highlights Need For Specific Insurance Disclaimers

  

  New York coverage counsel responsible for writing disclaimer letters should heed a recent appellate decision, Bahnuk v. Countryway Insurance, in which the letter sent to the plaintiff was deemed to be insufficiently specific, leaving the insurance company on the hook for coverage, says Dan Kohane at Hurwitz Fine.

• Big Oil Certiorari Denial May Alter Climate Change Litigation

  

  The U.S. Supreme Court's Monday decision not to review a handful of forum disputes in oil industry climate change litigation means that similar cases may face less corporate-friendly state courts, and insurers may see greater defense and damages exposures from Big Oil clients, say Dennis Anderson and Deepa Sutherland at Zelle.

• 5 Tips For Filing Gov't Notices After Insurance Producer M&A

  

  As insurance producer acquisition activity picks up in 2023, requiring a daunting process of notifying information changes to each Department of Insurance where the entity is licensed, certain best practices will help buyers alleviate frustration and avoid administrative actions and fines, say attorneys at Foley & Lardner.

• Policyholder Lessons From Sandy No-Coverage Decision

  

  A New York federal court recently decided that in the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, Madelaine Chocolate knew Great Northern Insurance’s all-risk policy offered no coverage for storm surge — an important reminder that policyholders should review policy language for ambiguities or anti-concurrent causation clauses, say Dennis Artese and Joshua Zelen at Anderson Kill.

• Insureds' Notice Pleading May Be Insufficient In Federal Court

  

  A recent New Jersey federal court ruling in Bauman v. Hanover Insurance held that bare-bones notice pleading was insufficient and dismissed the policyholder's coverage complaint, a reminder that courts may require more than an expression of general disagreement with an insurance company's denial letter to proceed with the case, says Eugene Killian at The Killian Firm.

• 5th Circ. Offers Expert Opinion Guidance For Insurance Cases

  

  A recent Fifth Circuit decision in Majestic Oil v. Lloyd's of London provides insight into how Texas' concurrent causation doctrine could affect insurance cases where the cause of damage is at issue, and raises considerations for litigants faced with new or revised expert reports after the deadline has passed, say Brian Scarbrough and Cianan Lesley at Jenner & Block.

• DUI Liability Ruling Affirms SC Isn't Direct Action-Friendly

  

  The Supreme Court of South Carolina's recent decision in Denson v. National Casualty not only clarifies the state's jurisprudence surrounding private rights of action and negligence per se, but also tacitly reinforces that South Carolina is not a direct-action state, say Anna Cathcart and Turner Albernaz at Phelps Dunbar.

• Peephole Cam Case Lowers The Bar On NY Negligence Claims

  

  A New York state appeals court's recent decision in Brown v. New York Design Center is significant because, barring a contrary state high court ruling, claims of negligent infliction of emotional distress need not demonstrate extreme and outrageous conduct, which could result in an uptick in such claims, say attorneys at Cahill Gordon.

• Employment-Related Litigation Risks Facing Hospitality Cos.

  

  A close look at recent hospitality industry employment claims highlights key issues companies should keep an eye out for, and insurance policy considerations for managing risk related to wage and hour, privacy, and human trafficking claims, say Jan Larson and Huiyi Chen at Jenner & Block.

• A Look At Florida's Aggressively Pro-Insurer Tort Reform

  

  Florida's new tort reform law is an unwarranted gift to insurance companies that seeks to strip policyholders of key rights while doing little to curb excessive litigation, say Garrett Nemeroff and Hugh Lumpkin at Reed Smith.

• Navigating High Court's Options In Insurer Choice Of Law

  

  Depending on how the U.S. Supreme Court approaches the question of when insurers may invoke choice-of-law clauses in maritime contracts to dodge state-specific liability, the Great Lakes v. Raiders Retreat Realty decision may mean significant changes not only for admiralty law disputes, but for the insurance industry more broadly, say Lara Cassidy and Adriana Perez at Hunton.

• 7th Circ. Adds To Range Of Opinions On MCS-90 Endorsement

  

  The Seventh Circuit's recent opinion in Prime Insurance Company v. Wright helps illustrate how the variation among courts as to when the federally mandated MCS-90 insurance endorsement for motor carriers is satisfied often hinges on exactly how "interstate commerce" is defined, says Rick Boepple at Akerman.

• NY Rulings Show Shift In Insurance Priority Approach

  

  Some recent New York state decisions considering coverage priority of primary and excess insurance policies and contractual indemnity claims run against clear policy language, which should trump extrinsic evidence of intent, says Dan Kohane at Hurwitz Fine.