Is there a duty to defend under a claims made policy when the insurer has notice of alleged malpractice before the policy period, but the insured is not sued until the policy period actually commences? In what appears to be a harsh result, the Tenth Circuit determined the notice and filing of suit were a single act.
Two Years and Counting
A minor milestone is reached today as we reach the two year anniversary of insurancelawhawaii.com. It has been an interesting and informative journey, keeping abreast of insurance issues in Hawai`i and elsewhere.
Again, thanks is extended to fellow Damon Key bloggers, Robert Thomas (http://www.inversecomdemnation.com) and Mark Murakami (http://www.oceanlawhawaiil.com), for feeding me with
Duty to Defend Injury Claims in Underlying Aerial Spraying Cases
In Dyncorp v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's , London, No. 08C-09-218, 2009 Del. Super. LEXIS 412 (Del. Super. Ct. Nov. 9, 2009), the court considered whether a duty to defend arose in several underlying suits for damage caused by aerial spraying over Colombia.
Pursuant to a contract with the United States government
Additional Insureds Not Entitled to Notice of Policy’s Cancellation
Defendants were sued in an underlying state court action. See Riverport Ins. Co. v. Oakland Cmty. Housing, Inc., No. C 08-3883, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104472 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2009). Defendants were additional insureds under a policy issued by Riverport. In its coverage action for declaratory judgment, Riverport secured an order awarding summary judgment that determined there
Zealous Representation of Insurer’s Refusal to Defend Leads to Sanctions
So much for the zealous representation of an insurer's denial of the duty to defend. This post at abajournal.com reports when the trial court rejected the insurer's argument it had no duty to defend, an appeal was filed before the Georgia appellate court. The appellate court found the appeal frivolous and sanctions of $2500
Landlord Covered as Additional Insured under Tenant’s Policy
An employee of Nava Restaurant was injured when he fell down the stairs while at work. He sued the property owner, Crescent One Buckhead Plaza, claiming negligent maintenance of the stairs. Crescent tendered the suit to Nava and its insurer, Transcontinental Insurance Company (TIC), based on the language of the lease and because Crescent was
Allegations of Insurers’ Fraud for Katrina Flood Claims Survive Motion to Dismiss
In an opinion primarily concerned with the intricacies of pleading under the False Claims Act, the Louisiana federal district court addressed allegations that insurers shifted Katrina claims from homeowners' to flood policies. See United States ex rel. Branch Consultants, L.L.C. v. Allstate Ins. Co., No. 06-4091, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101155 (E.D. La. Oct. 19
Motion for Remand Denied in Hurricane Ike Case
Fourteen months after Hurricane Ike hit the Gulf coastline of Texas, the initial onslaught of litigation is starting to surface in reported decisions. Our first post of undoubtedly many Hurricane Ike cases to come addresses a motion for remand after a coverage dispute was removed to federal court. See Lakewood Chiropractic Clinic v. Travelers Lloyds Ins.
Policy Covers Insured In Third Party Claim by Longshoreman
Note today's post [here] by my Damon Key colleague, Mark Murakami, regarding coverage for a claim related to the Longshore Harbor and Workers Compensation Act. See Bayou Steel Corp. v. Evanston Ins. Co., No. 08-31206 (5th Cir. Nov. 10, 2009). The policy excluded coverage for injuries imposed on the insured by contract
Statute of Limitations for Katrina Claim not Tolled by Insurer’s Negotiations
In Landry Architecture, LLC v. Valley Forge Ins. Co., No. 09-3974, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 99109 (E.D. La. Oct. 23, 2009), the insured's claims for business income losses resulting from Hurricane Katrina and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing did not survive the insurer's motion to dismiss on statute