Can an insured assign the rights to payment under its insurance policy even though the policy includes a consent-to-assignment clause? The Vermont Supreme Court recently answered, yes. See In re Ambassador Ins. Co., 2008 Vt. LEXIS 108 (Vt. Aug. 14, 2008).
Ambassador issued two occurrence-based excess policies to Green Industries
Just to prove we’ll do anything for our readers, this post is being made from my iPhone. Now we can blog 24/7!
A recent Wall Street Journal article critiques insurers for the recent use of computerized risk projection models to take global warming into account. Previously, insurers relied primarily on historical data to set rates. After the severe hurricanes in 2004, insurers started using new computer models to project natural catastrophes over the next several years (a
Coverage for a suit involving false billing claims submitted in violation of the False Claims Act is generally not recognized under a liability policy. This was the result reached in a recent case decided by the Tenth Circuit. See Zurich Am. Ins. Co. v. O’Hara Regional Center for Rehabilitation, Nos. 06-1357 and
The United States Supreme Court decided an insurance-related case last week involving the insurer’s potential conflict of interest in its dual role in administering and paying benefits under an ERISA plan. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn, No. 06-923 (U.S. Supreme Ct. June 19, 2008). MetLife was the administrator and insurer of
The Ninth Circuit recently decided that the insurer’s reliance upon a non-existent policy limit referenced by an endorsement was not supportable. See Ferguson v. Coregis Ins. Co., No. 06-35867 (9th Cir. June 3, 2008).
The policy issued to Coeur d-Alene School District by Coregis referred in several places to the
The Hawaii Federal District Court recently remanded a coverage case to allow the Hawaii state court to decide whether an exclusion in a professional liability policy was applicable. See Keown v. Tudor Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dis;t. LEXIS 42996 (D. Haw. May 30, 2008).
The insured was a realtor and
In Sturla, Inc. v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 67 Haw. 203, 684 P.2d 960 (1984), the Hawai`i Supreme Court determined that the distributor of allegedly defective carpet was an insured under a Vendor’s Endorsement, but found there was no coverage based on exclusions in the policy. The opposite result was reached in
In a prior post, we discussed Florida’s ongoing investigation of Allstate’s alleged collusion with other insurance companies to keep insurance rates artificially high. When Allstate failed to comply with a subpoena in January and testify about its property insurance business, it was suspended by Florida’s Office of Insurance Regulation.
Allstate’s
Unlike California, Hawai`i law does not statutorily impose strict disclosure requirements when an insurance enrollment application mandates that disputes be resolved solely by arbitration. California courts, on the other hand, narrowly construe an insurer’s attempt to limit disputes to arbitration, as evidenced by the recent decision in Rodriguez v. Blue Cross of California