Umbrella coverage typically provides two types of coverage: excess coverage and gap-filling coverage, which obligates the insurer to defend for any loss covered by the terms and conditions of the umbrella policy and not covered by the primary policy.  In Dairy Road Partners v. Island Ins. Co., Ltd., 92 Hawai`i, 992 P.2d 93 …

At stake in Gillan v. Government Employees Insurance Co., No. 28075 (Haw. Ct. App. April 17, 2008), was whether the insurer could deny Personal Injury Protection (PIP) benefits based upon a review of medical records by a doctor chosen by the insurer but without the insured’s approval.

Gillian was injured in an accident while …

Although it did not address insurance coverage, the Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals (ICA) issued an important decision regarding the state’s regulation of the insurance industry in Hawaii Insurers Council v. Lingle, et al, No. 27840 (Haw. Ct. App. April 14, 2008).

The Insurance Regulation Fund (IRF) was established by the legislature in 1999, …

Hawaii does not require a non-resident agent to secure approval for a newly written policy from a Hawaii resident agent.  Nevada, however, does have such a law.  The Ninth Circuit recently struck down Nevada’s countersignature law as a violation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of Article IV.  See Council of Insurance …

Continuing with its recent torrent of insurance coverage cases, the Ninth Circuit recently addressed whether an officer and director were covered under the corporation’s auto policy.  See Progressive Casualty Ins. C. v. Owen, No. 06-35677 (9^th Cir. March 26, 2008). The case relied on Montana law, which follow principles similar to those …

How often does a court take on the doctrine of uberrimae fidei?  The Hawaii appellate courts have never confronted uberrimae fidei.  The Ninth Circuit, however, has addressed the doctrine twice in a little more than a month.  We addressed in a prior post the Ninth Circuit’s prior handling of the …

     The Big, Bad Bear of Wall Street disintegrated earlier this week.  Shortly before its demise, the Bear suffered a significant insurance loss at the hands of the New York Court of Appeals.  Vigilant Ins. Co. v. The Bear Stearns Companies, Inc., No. 25 (N.Y. March 13, 2008).

     You may recall …

     The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals previously held an insurer faces a difficult burden justifying on summary judgment a denial of coverage due to incorrect information stated in an insurance application.  See First Ins. Co. of Hawaii, Ltd. v. Sariaslani, 80 Haw. 491, 911 P.2d 126 (Haw. Ct. App. 1996).  The ICA …