Rhode Island Supreme Court Takes Broad Approach to Household Residency

In Peerless Insurance Company v. Luppe, 2015 R.I. LEXIS 87 (R.I. June 17, 2015), the Rhode Island Supreme Court held that a minor child of divorced parents can be a resident of a non-custodial parent’s household. The relevant facts are as follows: Maya Henderson’s parents were divorced. Maya’s mother had physical custody. Maya’s father had visitation rights. At some point after the divorce, Maya began staying overnight with her father two nights per week. Maya kept some of her clothing
Continue reading...

Illinois Appellate Court Determines Unsigned Agreement Can Still Constitute a Written Contract and Trigger Additional Insured Coverage

In West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. v. DJW-Ridgeway Building Consultants, Inc., 2015 IL App (2d) 140441 (May 19, 2015), the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District affirmed a trial court decision and held that West Bend Mutual Insurance Co. had the duty to defend DJW-Ridgeway Building Consultants, Inc. (Ridgeway) as an additional insured. The underlying dispute arose out of any injury suffered by a construction worker at a worksite where Ridgeway was the general contractor. Ridgeway subcontracted with Jason the Mason,
Continue reading...

Eighth Circuit Deems MCS-90 Endorsement Applicable To Subrogation Claims

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit confronted a case of first impression and decided that the MCS-90 endorsement for motor carriers requires a tortfeasor’s insurer to compensate an injured party even if the injured party has already been compensated by its own insurer. More to the point, the Eighth Circuit allowed a subrogor to pursue relief against a tortfeasor’s insurer in accordance with the MCS-90 endorsement. As background, a semi-tractor and trailer operated by Yelder collided
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...

Seventh Circuit Holds Insurance Adjusters Owe No Legal Duty to the Insured

In Lodholtz v. York Risk Services Group, Inc. (Feb. 11, 2015), the Seventh Circuit afforded liability protection to outside claims adjusters by holding that they owe no legal duty to the insured. As background, York Risk Services Group, Inc. (“York”) was an insurance adjuster retained by Granite State Insurance Company (“Granite”), the insurer of Pulliam Enterprises, Inc. (“Pulliam”). Robert Lodholtz, the plaintiff, sustained injuries in a factory belonging to Pulliam and subsequently sued Pulliam. There was some confusion with regard
Continue reading...

The Insurer Is In Control: California District Court Upholds Insurer’s Right To Control Settlement and Conduct Its Due Diligence with Respect To a Coverage Investigation

In Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America v. Kaufman & Broad Monterey Bay, Inc., 2015 WL 581528 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 11, 2015), Travelers had issued commercial general liability insurance policies to Norcraft. The defendants were named as additional insureds on the policies. The defendants were sued for claims arising out of a residential development project. The defendants tendered their defense of the claims to Travelers, which accepted the tender and appointed counsel for the defendants. Travelers and the defendants asserted
Continue reading...

Texas Federal Court Bars Coverage Attorney’s Expert Testimony

In Corinth Investor Holdings, LLC v. Evanston Insurance Co., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172647 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 15, 2014), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas granted the plaintiff’s motion to strike the “expert” report of Michael W. Huddleston, an expert witness designated by the defendant insurer. Homeland Insurance Company (“HIC”) had designated Huddleston, an attorney with experience in insurance law, as an expert witness. Notably, HIC’s main coverage defenses were based on the policy’s “claims
Continue reading...

11th Circuit Refuses to Enforce Knowing Violation of Rights of Another Exclusion in FACTA Lawsuit

In Travelers Property Casualty Co. of America v. Kansas City Landsmen, L.L.C., No. 14-11006, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 453 (11th Cir. Jan. 12, 2015), the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Travelers Property Casualty Company of America and St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company (“insurers”). The Eleventh Circuit determined that the insurers may have a duty to defend The Kansas City Landsmen, LLC and A Betterway Rent-a-Car, Inc. (“Car Rental Companies”). The
Continue reading...

Schism Between Groups of Asbestos Claimants Following $358 Million Garlock Settlement

In a $358 million dollar agreement, which has drawn nationwide attention from insurers and other companies with asbestos liabilities, Garlock Sealing Technologies has agreed to settle all asbestos claims against the company. This agreement was made possible largely because of evidence that lawyers fraudulently inflated judgments and settlements. This development may aid other insurers and companies with asbestos liabilities to dispute similar claims brought by asbestos lawyers. Garlock Sealing Technologies is a wholly owned subsidiary of EnPro Industries, Inc., which
Continue reading...

Schism Between Groups of Asbestos Claimants Following $358 Million Garlock Settlement

In a $358 million agreement, which has drawn nationwide attention from insurers and other companies with asbestos liabilities, Garlock Sealing Technologies has agreed to settle all asbestos claims against the company.  This agreement was made possible largely because of evidence that lawyers fraudulently inflated judgments and settlements.  This development may aid other insurers and companies with asbestos liabilities to dispute similar claims brought by asbestos lawyers. Garlock Sealing Technologies is a wholly owned subsidiary of EnPro Industries, Inc., which manufactured
Continue reading...