The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, applying Georgia law, has held that the electronic data exclusion in commercial general liability (CGL) policies issued to a retail store company precluded coverage...more
In this episode of "Don’t Take No for an Answer," Lynda A. Bennett and Alexander B. Corson explore the complex issue of "allocation" in the context of defense costs in insurance claims. They discuss what steps to take when...more
Second Circuit Holds That Malpractice Insurer Has No Duty to Defend or to Indemnify Lawyer Because Of Business Enterprise Exclusion- Associated Industries Insurance Company sued its insureds, a lawyer, and his former law...more
A Massachusetts federal court, applying Massachusetts law, has held that the allocation of legal fees between two corporations is determined based on what reasonably would have been negotiated had each party in the joint...more
Hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of Lowenstein’s Insurance Recovery Group continue their discussion about the difference between the duty to defend, the duty to reimburse, and the duty to advance. They run through the...more
In this episode of “Don’t Take No for an Answer,” hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of Lowenstein’s Insurance Recovery Group discuss the difference between a duty to defend versus a duty to reimburse. They explain why...more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, applying Michigan law, has held that, even absent an express policy provision regarding recoupment, an insurer was entitled to recoup defense costs after...more
The Ohio Court of Appeals, applying Ohio law, has enforced an employment practices liability (“EPL”) carrier’s “other insurance” clause, holding that the insured’s commercial general liability (“CGL”) policy afforded primary...more
In situations where there is a dispute over a duty to defend, an insurer may provide a defense to its insured, subject to a reservation of rights, to not only deny coverage for a defense, but also to file a declaratory...more
The United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois has held that an insurance policy requires allocation of defense costs based on the parties’ relative legal exposure if it clearly and unequivocally...more
Applying Georgia law, a federal district court has held that an insured’s failure to seek consent to incur defense costs pursuant to a consent provision relieved the insurer from any obligation to provide coverage for those...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, applying California law, has held that, under a duty to defend policy, an insurer was required to pay defense costs incurred in a lawsuit where the lawsuit...more
In an insurance recovery case being handled by Payne & Fears partners Scott Thomas and Sarah Odia, an Arizona federal court, applying Nevada law, recently held that NGM Insurance Company breached its duty to defend its...more
Answering a certified question regarding a matter of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court has held that an insurer is entitled to reimbursement of defense costs expended in defense of an insured where a determination is...more
The Nevada Supreme Court held that insurers may seek reimbursement of defense costs if a court determines that it owed no duty to defend and the insurer reserved reimbursement rights. In Nautilus Insurance Company v....more
Florida House Bill 301—approved by the Florida Legislature in the 2019 Regular Session and signed by the Governor—addressed a number of different issues relating to insurance in Florida. This article discusses four of those...more
In negligence actions, Virginia has long adhered to the “collateral source rule” which holds that payments received by an injured plaintiff from a source other than the tortfeasor/defendant are not deducted from the damages...more