June 2009

    My Damon Key colleagues and fellow bloggers, Robert Thomas (inversecondemnation.com) and Mark Murakami (hawaiioceanlaw.com), quickly posted on their respective blogs Judge Sotomayor's decisions on maritime law (Mark's post here) and inverse condemnation (Robert's post here).  So . . . , where is the insurance blog's input?

    In an effort to keep pace (actually

     When the insured, Matkin, an architectural firm, was sued by GEWAC, Inc., shopping center owner, for improper drainage in a parking lot designed by Matkin, Everest, the insurer, refused to defend, contending Matkin had not given timely notice under the claims-made policy.  Matkin-Hoover Engineering, Inc. v. Everest National Ins. Co., No. 08-CV-0451, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44057 (W.D.

    The insured's property was damaged during Hurricane Katrina by wind, wind driven rain, flooding, storm surge and water in Jupiter v. Automobile Club Inter-Insurance Exchange, No. 07-1689, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44083 May 26, 2009). Plaintiff recovered $225,500 from Allstate, its flood insurance carrier.  The insured also held a homeowner's policy with Automobile Club

    The Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the district court's decision granting reimbursement and prejudgment interest on amounts paid to the insured for defense and settlement pursuant to a reservation of rights.  See Evanston Ins. Co. v. OEA, Inc., No. 07-15316 (9th Cir. May 21, 2009)[here]. 

    OEA acquired a claims-made policy from Evanston Insurance Company in 1998.  The