Risk Management, Duty to Defend, Commercial General Liability Policies

Georgia Federal Court Applies “Fungi or Bacteria” Exclusion and Holds Insurer Owed No Duty to Defend Mold Exposure Wrongful Death...

Akerman LLP on 3/25/2025

In Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance Company v. Hampton Court, L.P., et al. the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted an insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings that it owed...more

Electronic Data Exclusion Precludes Coverage for Payment Card Data Breach

Wiley Rein LLP on 2/11/2025

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

Insurance in the Know (Part 3): Recoupment of Defense Costs Is Not a “Right” in a Standard CGL Policy

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on 2/5/2025

The foundation of a policyholder’s agreement to pay premiums for a standard commercial general liability policy (CGL) is the insurer’s agreement to defend the policyholder against lawsuits and shoulder the costs of the...more

Fourth Circuit Finds Coverage for Cyber Incident under Commercial General Liability Policy

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP on 4/19/2016

On April 11, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rendered one of the first appellate-level decisions dealing with insurance coverage for a cyber event. The Fourth Circuit confirmed that a commercial...more

Hanging Around: Fourth Circuit Confirms the Coverage for Data Breach Can Still Be Found in Traditional Liability Policies

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on 4/15/2016

With today’s increased focus on data breaches and related cyber liability exposure, the insurance market continues to develop policies tailored to this unique risk. Insurers are also excluding cyber risks in many traditional...more

CA Supreme Court Finds “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses Unenforceable After Loss Occurs During the Policy Period

Haight Brown & Bonesteel LLP on 8/24/2015

In Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court (No. S205889; filed 8/20/15), the California Supreme Court overruled its earlier decision in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. (2003) 29 Cal.4th 934, holding that...more

California Supreme Court Limits Enforceability of Anti-Assignment Clauses

Proskauer Rose LLP on 8/24/2015

In a unanimous decision handed down by the California Supreme Court on August 20, 2015 in Fluor Corporation v. Superior Court, the court removed a significant obstacle facing companies that want to assign their interests in a...more

Risk Management › Duty to Defend › Commercial General Liability Policies