With increasing frequency, insurers are challenging the sufficiency and clarity of settlement demands they failed to previously accept. The insurer’s challenges can take many forms but most focus on a demand not being written...more
Insurance laws may vary slightly between jurisdictions but major principles are nearly uniform. These include requirements that an insurer should draft clear and unambiguous exclusions and should identify and fully inform the...more
In the intricate landscape of catastrophic trucking cases and the interplay of multiple layers of liability insurance can resemble a precarious game of Jenga. Each move carries the potential to destabilize the structure,...more
In Truck Ins. Exch. v. Kaiser Cement, 321 Cal. Rptr. 3d 761, 549 P.3d 781 (2024), the California Supreme Court answered the question left open by Montrose Chem. Corp. v. Superior Ct., 9 Cal. 5th 215 (2020) (Montrose III): for...more
What happens between a primary and excess liability insurer when their mutual insured is hit with a verdict $2.15 million over the primary limit and the excess insurer was not put on notice until after the verdict? This was...more
Join Goldberg Segalla attorneys Zachary D. Oliva and Thomas M. Wester for a free interactive webinar as they discuss the duties and obligations of excess insurers when presented with high-value claims....more
Excess insurers facing claims should heavily scrutinize their policies for conditions that may be unsatisfactory —even if seemingly immaterial— because they can provide a complete defense to coverage. In a recent case, an...more
Hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of Lowenstein Sandler discuss how to access a tower of insurance coverage in light of the recent decision in Pharmacia Corporation v. Arch Specialty Insurance Company, where an...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, applying South Carolina law, has ruled that an insurer had no duty to defend an insured in a defamation action because its policy provided excess coverage, even where...more
For nearly 100 years, courts across the country have followed the established majority view that an excess insurer may not avoid its coverage obligation by imposing technical requirements on the manner in which underlying...more
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, applying New Jersey law, has affirmed that an excess policy did not provide coverage when an insured could not satisfy an express condition precedent to coverage...more
DRI's Insurance Coverage and Practice Symposium is the flagship educational and networking program for insurance executives, claims professionals, and outside counsel who specialize in insurance coverage. This year's...more
Today on “Don't Take No for an Answer,” co-hosts Lynda A. Bennett and Eric Jesse of the Insurance Recovery Group at Lowenstein Sandler discuss how to deal with excess insurers who refuse to follow a primary insurer’s...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, applying Illinois and Nevada law, has held that prior or pending litigation exclusions bar coverage for a contempt motion filed in a civil action commenced before...more
Court Finds That Defense Documents Must Be Produced Because Placed “At Issue” by Late Notice- In this declaratory judgment action, American Empire Surplus Lines Insurance Company sought insurance coverage on behalf of its...more
Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. sued OneBeacon Insurance Co. for breach of a facultative reinsurance certificate. Fireman’s Fund settled claims with its insured and allocated a portion of the settlement to a Fireman’s Fund...more
Pfizer, Inc. v. U.S. Specialty Insurance Company, C.A. No. N18C-01-310 PRW CCLD (Del. Super. Aug. 28, 2020) - On cross-motions for summary judgment in a director and officer insurance coverage dispute, the Superior Court...more
Policyholders purchase excess coverage with the reasonable expectation that they will not face a series of different coverage positions from multiple layers of insurers when seeking payment for claims, but that is not always...more
In Santa Fe Braun v. Ins. Co. of North America (No. A151428, filed 7/13/20), a California appeals court relied on Montrose Chemical Corp. of California v. Superior Court (2020) 9 Cal.5th 215 (Montrose III), to hold that...more
In a long-running environmental case, the state’s high court rejects insurers’ theory of so-called horizontal exhaustion. California Supreme Court hands policyholders a victory in latest Montrose case and upholds...more
On April 6, 2020, the California Supreme Court issued a decision that held a policyholder is entitled to access available excess coverage under any excess policy once it has exhausted directly underlying excess policies for...more
Every policyholder will likely face a scenario where its primary insurer refuses a settlement offer within limits. The primary insurer is potentially liable for that excess verdict if it acted in bad faith by refusing to...more
An insurer defending a claim against an insured that could exceed policy limits has a good faith obligation to settle the claim if possible. Failure to do so puts a nonsettling insurer at grave risk. An Eleventh Circuit...more
Last week, the Seventh Circuit had occasion to consider the scope of a contractual liability exclusion in the context of professional liability coverage. In Crum & Forster Specialty Ins. Co. v. DVO, Inc., No. 18-2571, 2019 WL...more
A business concedes that it made a mistake, but pleads for mercy with the jury and asks for a reasonable amount of damages. A jury ultimately awards $6 million. There are several insurance policies involved. Who is left...more