Sarah J. Delaney

All articles by Sarah J. Delaney

 

Massachusetts Ruling Costs Plaintiff More Than $4 Million in Bad-Faith Litigation Lawsuit: Post-Judgment Interest Not a Factor in Punitive Damages Calculations

In Anderson et al. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh PA & Others, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held that post-judgment interest should not be factored into a punitive damages calculation against an insurer when it was found to have acted willfully and egregiously by engaging in unfair trade practices and refusing to settle the underlying tort suit. In reversing the lower court’s grant of trebled post-judgment interest, the court left other parts of the verdicts undisturbed, ending
Continue reading...  

U.S. Court of Appeals Issues Major Ruling Against CFPB

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently issued a decision in PHH v. CFPB that fundamentally transforms the power of one of the newest and most powerful agencies in the federal government, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). First, the court held that the structure of the CFPB was unconstitutional and struck down a provision that only allows the president to dismiss the director of the CFPB for cause. After this decision, the director now
Continue reading...  

You’re Barred. Again: Negligent Acts, Conditional Language, and the Assault/Battery Exclusion

A fatal shooting took place at a bar. The bar purchased an insurance policy, which contained an assault and battery exclusion, barring coverage for bodily injury or property damage arising out of “any actual, threatened or alleged assault or battery” and the “failure to any insured or anyone else for whom any insured is or could be held legally liable to prevent or suppress any assault or battery.” The bar and additional insured premises owner were sued for negligent security
Continue reading...  

Which Came First? Turns Out, It May Not Matter. Illinois Appeals Court Weighs in on Anticoncurrent-Causation Clause for the First Time

For the first time, an Illinois court addressed an anti-concurrent causation clause. In Bozek v. Erie Ins., 2015 IL App.(2d) 150155 (Dec. 17, 2015) , an Illinois appellate court held a homeowner’s insurance policy’s anti-concurrent causation clause precluded coverage because an excluded event, hydrostatic pressure, contributed to a single loss (the lifting of a pool out of the ground). The plaintiffs incurred damage to their in-ground swimming pool after a heavy rain storm. The large amount of rain saturated the
Continue reading...  

Employee’s Equitable Interest in Boss’s Life Insurance Policy Trumps Boss’s Ability to Designate Wife as Beneficiary

In Shuttle v. Ligor (Mass. App. Ct., Nov. 20, 2015) the Massachusetts Court of Appeals held an employer was equitably estopped from changing the beneficiary of his life insurance policy from his employee to his wife, but the wife (who received the policy proceeds) owed nothing to the employee. An employee of many years had been informed by her boss that she was designated as a beneficiary under his life insurance policy. The employee was told that her boss’s designation of
Continue reading...  

Equity Trumps “Love.” And Designated Beneficiaries. With ERISA’s Blessing. Court Imposes Constructive Trust on Life Insurance Proceeds and Insurer Triumphs Through Interpleader

In McCarthy v. Estate of McCarthy, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153107 (SDNY, November 10, 2015), a federal judge imposed a constructive trust on the proceeds of a life insurance policy in favor of the decedent’s ex-wife and children over his girlfriend. Equity required the constructive trust due to the decedent’s breach of his divorce agreement, regardless of who was actually the designated beneficiary. Pursuant to the terms of a 2012 divorce settlement, the decedent agreed to a number of conditions
Continue reading...  

Accommodations for Contraception Coverage Exemptions Replace Subsidies As The ACA Story of the Week

In recent months, the main event in the challenges against the Affordable Care Act centered on the subsidies provisions in the ACA. The Supreme Court decided this matter in King v. Burwell. In July 2015, there were two additional key developments related to the provision requiring employers to provide contraception coverage. On July 14, 2015, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in Little Sisters of the Poor Home v. Burwell held that the self-certifying procedure in place for religious not-for-profits
Continue reading...  

Anti-Concurrent-Causes Clause Bars Coverage When One Cause is Excluded

In JAW The Pointe, L.L.C., v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2015 WL 1870054 (Tex. April 24, 2015), the Texas Supreme Court found an insurer did not violate the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act by denying coverage where the damages in question were caused in part by flooding, a cause excluded by the policy. JAW The Pointe purchased an apartment complex in Galveston, Texas in 2007, only 14 months before Hurricane Ike struck. The complex sustained significant
Continue reading...  

AD&D Policy Beneficiaries’ Recovery Limited To Death Benefits — No Recovery for Dismemberment Injuries Leading To Death

In Malbrough v. Kanawha Insurance Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48394 (W.D. La. Apr. 9, 2015), the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana was asked to determine the benefit payable to the plaintiff beneficiaries under an Accidental Death and Dismemberment insurance policy issued by Kanawha. The court held in favor of the insurers, ruling that the beneficiaries were limited to death benefits only, and not to additional benefits relating to the loss of the decedent’s foot. Following
Continue reading...  

Florida Court of Appeals Permits Post-Loss Assignment of Benefits to Third Party

In Accident Cleaners, Inc. v. Universal Insurance Co., 2015 SL 1609973 (Fla. Ct.App. April 10, 2015) the Florida Court of Appeals, Fifth District held the assignee of benefits under an insurance policy was not required to have an insurable interest in the insured property at the time of loss. The court further held that so long as the assignor had an insurable interest in the insured property at the time of the loss, such insurable interest is imputed to the
Continue reading...  

No Coverage for Financial Firm that Invested Clients’ Money in Ponzi Scheme

A securities firm sought coverage under a professional liability policy for claims by customers that suffered losses on real estate investment vehicles. The Panel for the Second Appellate District in California found that the policyholder was not entitled to coverage because the “application exclusion” in the firm’s policy bars coverage for the claims asserted, as the policyholder did not disclose the facts of the claims against it to the insurer in its application. The claimants brought suit, asserting that the
Continue reading...  

The Latest Insurance Law Decisions – Goldberg Segalla’s CaseWatch: Insurance is Now Available

Please click here for the latest edition of CaseWatch Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.  
Continue reading...  

No Business Loss Coverage for Sandy Flooding

A Southern District Court judge ruled that an insurer was not required to pay lost business coverage after Superstorm Sandy due to a flood provision contained in the policy. In this case, a law firm sought coverage from its insurer when its lower Manhattan office was evacuated due to flooding from the Sandy Storm. The insured law firm sought coverage under the policy’s civil authority provision and moved for summary judgment while the insurer cross moved for summary judgment because
Continue reading...  

Eighth Circuit Holds Company Name is Not “Advertisement” Under Insurance Policy

On Thursday, March 26, 2015 the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals defined the term ‘slogan’ in affirming a lower court’s decision that a company name that did not express position, stand, or goal and was not “attention-getting” or educational about that company’s purported goal is not covered as an advertising injury. (See the full opinion here.) In the underlying lawsuit, Excell Consumer Products brought claims against Smart Candle under the Lanham Act, alleging the battery-operated candle maker infringed its copyrights
Continue reading...  

Where There is Fire, There is Smoke

In Hobson v. Indian Harbor Insurance Co., No. 316714, 2015 WL 1069242 (Mich. Ct. App. Mar. 10, 2015), the appellate court in Michigan rejected the insurers’ interpretation of the pollution exclusion in the landlord’s commercial general liability (“CGL”) insurance policy to deny the tenants’ bodily injury claim. The dispute arose when the plaintiffs sustained bodily injuries from a fire that broke out in the apartment building where they resided. Subsequently, the plaintiffs sued the landlord and its insurers, alleging that
Continue reading...  

Structural Damage Doesn’t Mean Any Damage to Structure

In Hegel v. First Liberty Insurance Corp., No. 14-10549, 2015 WL 821146 (11th Cir. Feb. 27, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment for the policyholder, finding that “structural damage” does not mean any “damage to the structure.” The coverage dispute arose when the insurer First Liberty Insurance Corp. (“First Liberty”) denied the policyholders’ claim for a “sinkhole loss” which their homeowner’s insurance policy defined as “structural damage to the building, including the foundation, caused
Continue reading...  

Kmart Corporation v. Footstar, Inc.

U.S. App. LEXIS 1775 (7th Cir. February 4, 2015) Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify Limited to Insured’s Agreed Upon “Work” and Did Not Apply to Liability Arising from Actions of the Insured Outside Scope of “Work” and In Breach of the Agreement In Kmart Corporation v. Footstar, Inc., Nos. 14-1242, 14-1356, 14-1359, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 1775 (7th Cir. Feb. 4, 2015), the Seventh Circuit reversed the district court’s finding that Footstar, Inc. (“Footstar”) and its insurer Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance
Continue reading...  

Insurer Owes No Coverage for Property Damage Due to Late Notice

There was a dispute between the former executives of a dissolved construction company and its insurer over property damages. The executives of the dissolved insured had agreed to a settlement of $420,000 with home owners over allegedly shoddy work performed on their homes in 2006.  The insured had a claims-made general liability policy with the insured, and sought coverage for the $420,000 settlement. The insurer brought a motion for summary judgment based on late notice. The insured had been initially
Continue reading...  

Abuse of Discretion Where Insurer Failed to Consider “Similar Income” Requirement

George v. Reliance Std. Life Ins. Co. 5th Cir., Jan. 15, 2015 In the appeal of an ERISA disability benefits denial, the Fifth Circuit found an abuse of discretion where the insurer failed to consider the “similar income” provision. The insurer had found in its investigation that the claimant was not totally disabled under the policy as there were sedentary jobs for which the insured was able to perform. What the court found lacking, was any discussion of whether the
Continue reading...  

D.C. Court Agrees to Hear Halbig En Banc

On September 4, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit granted the U.S. Government’s petition to re-hear Halbig v. Burwell en banc which means that all active judges on the court will now hear the case. For a more detailed explanation of the general arguments in Halbig, click here.  However, in short, the question is whether the subsidies provided for by the Affordable Care Act for those who purchase health insurance through the exchanges apply to purchases
Continue reading...  

The Latest Insurance Law Decisions – Goldberg Segalla’s CaseWatch: Insurance is Now Available

Please click here for the latest edition of CaseWatch Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

The Latest Insurance Law Decisions – Goldberg Segalla’s CaseWatch: Insurance is Now Available

Please click here for the latest edition of CaseWatch Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance and Bad Faith Focus, January 2014 Editions Now Available

Please click for the latest edition of CaseWatch Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. Please click for the latest edition of Bad Faith Focus. Bad Faith Focus provides timely summaries of and access to key bad faith litigation matters throughout the United States. CaseWatch and Bad Faith Focus is the collaborative effort of Goldberg Segalla’s Global Insurance Services Practice Group. We appreciate your interest
Continue reading...  

Cases for the January 2014 Editions of CaseWatch: Insurance and Bad Faith Focus

The below cases correspond with the January edition of CaseWatch: Insurance and the analysis of each case. Click here for access to the newsletter. Cases are provided courtesy of LexisNexis. Casewatch: Insurance  120 Greenwich Development Associates v. Admiral Indemnity Company and TIG Insurance Company Amerisure Ins. Co. v. Orange & Blue Constr., Inc. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Lobrow Camico Mut. Ins. Co. v. Rogozinski Cardenas v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. v. United Gen. Tit. Ins. Co.
Continue reading...  

West Virginia Hands Down Victory to Life Insurers in 69 Death Master File Actions

From September 30, 2012 to December 28, 2012, the plaintiff, John D. Perdue, Treasurer of the State of West Virginia filed sixty-nine (69) individual civil lawsuits against life insurance companies doing business in the State of West Virginia alleging that the insurers have failed to comply with the requirements of the West Virginia Uniform Unclaimed Property Act (UPA), i.e., that they have failed to turn over unclaimed property to the State Treasurer. The complaints further alleged that the Insurers had
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance December 2013 Edition Now Available

Please click here for the latest edition of CaseWatch: Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. CaseWatch is the collaborative effort of Goldberg Segalla’s Global Insurance Services Practice Group. We appreciate your interest and welcome your feedback. Please share this publication with your colleagues. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney
Continue reading...  

Cases for the December 2013 Edition of CaseWatch

The below cases correspond with the December edition of CaseWatch: Insurance and the analysis of each case. Click here for access to the newsletter. Cases are provided courtesy of LexisNexis. ACE European Group, Ltd. v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co. Agrakey Solutions, LLC v. Mid-Continent Cas. Co. Am. Prof’l Risk Servs., Inc. v. Gotham Ins. Co. Anderson Bros. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. Axis Insurance et al. v. Buffalo Marine Baker v. Hedstrom Cava v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh,
Continue reading...  

President Obama’s ACA Extension – NAIC Response

With the January 2014 effective date under the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) essential benefits and guaranteed coverage provisions quickly approaching, several million people have received a cancellation notice. Facing wild criticism, President Obama responded with a regulatory fix that will allow Americans to keep ACA non-compliant insurance policies, albeit temporarily. The extension gives American consumers the option to renew their current non-conforming plans for one year. This extension mostly affects those plans not grandfathered in under the ACA, including those
Continue reading...  

D.C. Circuit Deals Latest Blow to ACA Contraception Mandate

The court started its opinion by stating “we are asked to revisit the behemoth known as the Affordable Care Act … we must determine whether the contraceptive mandate imposed by the Act trammels the right of free exercise — a right that lies at the core of our constitutional liberties — as protected by the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. We conclude it does.” “The query is simple: do corporations enjoy the shelter of the Free Exercise Clause? Or is the
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance October 2013 Edition Now Available

Please click here for the latest edition of CaseWatch: Insurance. CaseWatch: Insurance provides timely summaries of and access to insurance law decisions and legislation.  For ease of reference, we have organized cases by topic. CaseWatch is the collaborative effort of Goldberg Segalla’s Global Insurance Services Practice Group. We appreciate your interest and welcome your feedback. Please share this publication with your colleagues. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney
Continue reading...  

Cases for the October 2013 Edition of CaseWatch

The below cases correspond with the October edition of CaseWatch: Insurance and the analysis of each case. Click here for access to the newsletter. Cases are provided courtesy of LexisNexis. Affinity Health Plan Am. Econ. Ins. Co. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. Biochemics, Inc. v. Axis Reinsurance Co. Brannan Paving GP, LLC v. Pavement Markings, Inc. Carolina Cas. Ins. Co. v. Nanodetex Corp. Detroit Med. Ctr. v. Progressive Michigan Insurance Company Doe Run Resources Corporation v. Lexington Insurance Company Dupree v. Scottsdale Ins.
Continue reading...  

Caveat Emptor – Let the Buyer Beware of Health Care Phish

Caveat emptor — “Let the buyer beware” is a good rule of thumb for people to keep in mind as they begin to sign up for health insurance under the new exchanges established in accordance with the Affordable Care Act. Law enforcement and security professionals are warning consumers to beware of phishing schemes associated with the new health care exchanges. Insurers and employers alike can assist in this effort by educating consumers and employees on this danger and provide practical
Continue reading...  

Double Trouble: No Summary Judgment Where Trucking Company May Qualify as Insured Under Multiple Policies

Canal Ins. Co. v. Great W. Cas. Co., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133344, 1-2 (D. Minn. Sept. 18, 2013) In this is a declaratory judgment action, the plaintiff Canal Insurance Company  (Canal) sought insurance coverage from the defendant, Great West Casualty Company (Great West), relating to an underlying trucking accident. In its complaint Canal admitted that the Canal policy provides coverage, but alleges that such coverage is excess to the primary coverage provided by the Great West policy. Great West
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance September 2013 Edition Now Available; Introducing Bad Faith Focus

For a free copy of CaseWatch: Insurance, please click here. For a free copy of our new complement to CaseWatch: Insurance, Bad Faith Focus, please click here. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance and Bad Faith Focus directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

Cases for the September 2013 Edition of CaseWatch: Insurance and Bad Faith Focus

Cases provided courtesy of LexisNexis. CaseWatch: Insurance Cases Admiral Ins. Co. v. Shah & Associates Admiral Insurance Company v. Marsh Alabama Gas v Travelers Aleman v. Ace Am. Ins. Co., Allstate Ins. Co. v. Nassiri Attorneys Liability Protection Society, Inc. v. Whittington Law Associates, PLLC Automax Hyundai South, L.L.C. v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co. Ba v. HSBC USA, Inc. California Ass’n of Rural Health Clinica; Avenal Community Health Center v. Douglas City of San Buenaventura v. Ins. Co. Colonial Oil
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance July 2013 Edition Now Available

For a free copy, please click here. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

Cases for the July 2013 Edition of CaseWatch: Insurance

Cases provided courtesy of LexisNexis. Aioi Nissay Dowa Ins. Co. v. Prosight Specialty Mgmt. Co. Ali v Federal Atl. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Paszko Masonry, Inc Atlantic Cas. Ins. Co. v. Paszko Masonry, Inc. Bearden v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., CGS Indus. v. Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co. Colonial Oil Industries, Inc. v. Indian Harbor Ins. Co. Doe Run Res. Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co. v. Holmes Murphy & Associates, Inc. Hackstaff Law
Continue reading...  

It’s Only Temporary: Employee Hired to Meet Short-Term Workload Conditions on Indefinite Basis Is “Temporary Worker” Under Policy

Central Mut. Ins. Co. v. True Plastics, Inc. (Mass. Ct. App. July 10, 2013) A Massachusetts appellate court recently held that the phrase “short-term workload conditions” as used in a liability policy’s definition of “temporary worker” was unambiguous and could include workers hired on an indefinite basis. The claimant was injured while operating a molding machine at the insured’s plant. The claimant was not an employee of the insured company (a manufacturer of plastic components), but rather had been assigned
Continue reading...  

California Cuts To Rural Healthcare Services Violate Medicaid Act

California Ass’n of Rural Health Clinica; Avenal Community Health Center v. Douglas et al. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, July 5, 2013 California recently enacted legislation that eliminates coverage for certain healthcare services in under-served rural areas to help curb the State’s budgetary woes. Specifically, the legislation cut coverage for adult dental, podiatry, optometry and chiropractic services in rural areas. The court ruled that eliminating coverage for such programs would be in conflict with the Medicaid
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance June 2013 Edition Now Available

For a free copy, please click here. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

Cases for the June 2013 Edition of CaseWatch: Insurance

Cases provided courtesy of LexisNexis. 90-Day Rule – 45 CFR Parts 144, 146, and 147 4815 Dev. Corp. v. Harleysville Ins. Co. Atl. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Cheyenne Country Barlee v. First Horizon Nat’l Corp. Burke v. Ability Ins. Co. Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Space SystemsLoral, Inc. City of New York v. Nova Cas. Co. Dodd v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co. Encore Receivables Mgmt. v. Ace Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. Federal Ins. Co. v. Sandusky Gear Auto.
Continue reading...  

U.S. Supreme Court Grants Petition to Clarify ERISA Technicality

Ray Haluch Gravel Co., et al., v. Cent. Pension Fund of the Int’l Union of Oper. Eng’rs & Participating Emp’rs, et al., case No. 12-992 Petition Granted June 17, 2013 According to the petition, “[t]he question presented in this case, on which there is an acknowledged conflict among nine circuits, is whether a district court’s decision on the merits that leaves unresolved a request for contractual attorney’s fees is a “final decision” under 28 U.S.C. § 1291.” The U.S. Supreme
Continue reading...  

Court Finds that Ownership is indeed 9/10th of the Law in Rescission Case

PHL Variable Ins. Co. v. P. Bowie 2008 Irrevocable Trust (1st Cir. (R.I.) May 13, 2013) The First Circuit recently held that an insurer may retain life insurance premiums following a policy rescission to offset the loss it has suffered. The ruling is notable because courts typically require an insurer to refund an insured’s policy premium where a rescission is effected. In PHL, an insurance broker submitted an application for life insurance for Peter Bowie. Bowie’s application represented that he
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance May 2013 Edition Now Available

For a free copy, please click here. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

Cases for the May 2013 Edition of CaseWatch: Insurance

Cases provided courtesy of LexisNexis. AB Green Gansevoort, LLC v. Peter Scalamandre & Sons, Inc. Atl. Cas. Ins. Co. v. Cheyenne Country Bank of America, N.A. v. Superior Court Boston Gas Co. v. Century Indemnity Co. Colby v. Union Security Insurance Co. Coleman v. Supervalu, Inc. Collective Brands, Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. Conestoga Wood Specialists Corp. v. U.S. Dept. of H.H.S. Entitle Ins. Co. v. Darwin Select Ins. Co. Evanston Ins. Co. v. Crocilla First Tenn. Bank
Continue reading...  

Both Parties Flying High and Feeling Grounded at Supreme Court

 US Airways v. McCutchen It is somewhat rare for a trial and appellate court to disagree and, upon appeal to the United States Supreme Court, find out they were both wrong. It is even rarer for both parties in this action to win and lose simultaneously in a decision. And yet, on Tuesday, April 16, 2013, the scenario described above happened in US Airways v. McCutchen. The ruling from Justice Elena Kagan was a mixed bag. On one hand, the
Continue reading...  

Federal Prosecutors Indict Health Insurance TPA for $9 Million in Overstated Loss Ratios

United States v. Gutschlag, GM-Southwest, Inc. U.S. Dist. Ct., W.D.Va. April 8, 2013 Third Party Administrator GM – Southwest, Inc. (TPA), and its former owner John Paul Gutschlag, Sr. contracted with Virginia Tech from 2003-2011 to provide health insurance to the school’s undergraduate and graduate students. The premiums for the health insurance were paid directly to the TPA, who accounted for the premiums received, deducted its commission, and then delivered the balance to the carriers. Each year the TPA was
Continue reading...  

“Restitution, Community Service, and Probation Not Enough – You Did the $3 Million Crime, You Will Do Time”

United States of America v. Rick A. Kulhman No. 11-15959 (11th Cir. 2013) Dr. Rick Kuhlman, a chiropractor who operated in Atlanta, GA, and Nashville, TN, pled guilty to running a five-year, $3 million health care fraud scheme. He appeared to be the perfect defendant because of his efforts to make things right and a willingness to educate others on the criminal nature of his actions. Therefore, the district court ruled out a jail sentence. However, the 11th Circuit reversed
Continue reading...  

CaseWatch: Insurance February 2013 Edition Now Available

For a free copy, please click here. If you would like to receive future editions of CaseWatch: Insurance directly by email, please contact Sarah Delaney at sdelaney@goldbergsegalla.com.
Continue reading...  

Cases for the February 2013 Edition of CaseWatch: Insurance

Cases provided courtesy of LexisNexis. Alco Iron & Metal Co. v. Am. Int’l Specialty Lines Ins. Co. Aquarius Well Drilling, Inc., v. American States Ins. Co. Brink v. XE Holding Colony Ins. Co. v. Kwasnik, Kanowitz & Associates, P.C. Companion Prop. And Cas. Ins. Co. v. Moreno Dupree v. Scottsdale Ins. Co. Dean v. N.Y. Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. Everest Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Evanston Ins. Co., Fisher v. JP Morgan Chase & Co. Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoefer
Continue reading...