News & Analysis as of

Insurance Litigation Policy Terms CA Supreme Court

Rivkin Radler LLP

September 2024 Insurance Update

Rivkin Radler LLP on

In this month’s update, we discuss Russian-seized planes, Starbucks-caused traffic jams, a squabble over the use of a family name, a restaurant’s pandemic-based loss, a poorly built house, and whether insurance covers any of...more

Troutman Pepper

California Supreme Court Confirms Vertical Exhaustion Rule Applies Before Depletion of All Primary Coverage

Troutman Pepper on

On June 7, the California Supreme Court issued an important opinion clarifying the circumstances under which an insured may trigger coverage under an excess policy in relation to a loss spanning multiple policy periods. This...more

Jones Day

California Supreme Court: CGL Policies Permit "Vertical Exhaustion" for Long-tail Continuous Injuries

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the California Supreme Court reaffirmed a policyholder's right to reach excess liability coverage by providing key guidance as to the proper exhaustion method for continuous injury claims spanning...more

White and Williams LLP

The Complex Insurance Coverage Reporter - 2019 Year in Review

White and Williams LLP on

Welcome to CICR’s annual review of insurance cases. Here, we spotlight five decisions from the last year that you should know about—and five pending cases to watch. As our picks for “Cases to Know” indicate, 2019 was not a...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

3 Lessons For Calif. Insureds From Late-Notice Rule Decision

In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy of...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Insurers Beware: Choice of Law Provisions May be Overridden by Public Policy Provisions

Saul Ewing LLP on

In answering two questions posed to it by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the California Supreme Court on August 29, 2019, addressed two significant issues: 1) whether California’s common law notice-prejudice rule is a...more

Buchalter

California Supreme Court holds that “Notice-Prejudice Rule” Is a “Fundamental Public Policy” of California for the Purpose of...

Buchalter on

On August 29, 2019, the California Supreme Court issued a decision on an important issue to many insurance coverage disputes. In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., the Court held that California’s...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

California Supreme Court Ruling Clarifies That the Notice-Prejudice Rule Is a Fundamental Public Policy That May Override Choice...

In Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, the California Supreme Court resolved two previously open questions in insurance law: (1) it concluded that the notice-prejudice rule is a fundamental public policy of...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

California Supreme Court Applies Notice-Prejudice Rule to Violation of First-Party Consent Provision as a Predicate to Policy...

Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, — P.3d –, 2019 WL 4065521 (2019); California Supreme Court, Case No. S239510 (Aug. 29, 2019). On certified questions by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the California...more

White and Williams LLP

California Supreme Court Holds “Notice-Prejudice” Rule is “Fundamental Public Policy” of California, May Override Choice of Law...

On August 29, 2019, in Pitzer College v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company, 2019 Cal. LEXIS 6240, the California Supreme Court held that, in the insurance context, the common law “notice-prejudice” rule is a “fundamental public...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide