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
In Loblaw Companies Limited v. Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Company of Canada, 2024 ONCA 145, the Ontario Court of Appeal, among other things, overturned the lower court’s finding that insureds were entitled to seek 100% of...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
Policyholders purchase liability insurance expecting that, when they are sued, their defense will be paid for by their insurer. Because the key value of liability insurance is that it is really “litigation insurance,” courts...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
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
The Second Department, Appellate Division, for the Supreme Court of New York, recently held in a matter of first impression, that an insurance company with a duty to defend may not recover defense costs after a determination...more
Applying Arizona law, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona held that an insurer that breached its duty to defend bears the burden of demonstrating that an allocation of defense costs between covered...more
In an unpublished decision, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the Central District of California’s interpretation of the related acts provision in a professional liability policy, holding that related acts reported in a prior policy...more