DRI Announces New Counsel Meeting Incentives for New Economy – In-House Can attend at No Cost

DRI has issued new incentives which allow a corporation to have a meeting with its outside counsel at the DRI Annual Meeting in Chicago October 4-7 at no cost to the company. Travel is included. Download Detailed Incentives Program Download DRI 2009 Annual Meeting Brochure For more information contact: Dan Gerber at dgerber@goldbergsegalla.com
Continue reading...

Claims Made During Extended Reporting Period Deemed Uncovered

James River Insurance Co. v. Alliance Children's Servs., Inc. (D. Mass. May 8, 2009) A CGL insurer sued its policyholder, seeking a declaration that it was not obligated to defend or indemnify it in an underlying wrongful death action because the claim was not made during the policy period. The court granted the insurer summary judgment, finding that the policy expressly required that, to be covered, a claim must be made during the policy period, not during the extended reporting
Continue reading...

Life Insurance Carrier Waived Right to Rescind Policy, Despite Finding Action was Timely Commenced

Security Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Rodriguez (New York State, Appellate Division, 1st Dept.)  May 26, 2009 Although life insurer’s action was not barred by the incontestability clause, the court held it waived its right to rescind the policy after it continued to collect premiums.  There, the insurance carrier commenced an action seeking to rescind a life insurance policy based on the policyholder’s alleged false and misleading representations.  Pursuant to the statutory requirement of New York Insurance Law §3203, the
Continue reading...

Court Finds That Insurer Has a Duty to Defend Under Claims-Made Pollution Liability Policy

N. Yamhill Station, LLC. v. Great American Alliance Ins. Co. (District Court, Oregon, May 21, 2009)   Effective October 6, 2006, plaintiffs’ gas station was covered by a pollution liability policy.  In November 2006, a leak in a gasoline storage tank was discovered.  The insurer denied coverage because the leak commenced before the inception date of the policy.  However, the court disagreed, holding that the underlying complaint could be reasonably interpreted as alleging that an environmental incident occurred after the
Continue reading...

Cases Cited in Goldberg Segalla’s Reinsurance Review – June 2009 Edition

Supreme Court Decision – Download Andersen.v.Carlisle Tenth Circuit Decision – Download Mid-Continent v. General Re Eighth Circuit Decision – Download In re Acceptance Insurance Co. Third Circuit Decision – Download Swiss Reinsurance v. Airport Northern District of California Decision - Download The Flintkote Co. v. General Accident Assurance Co. Eastern District of Louisana Decision  - Download Imperial Trading Co. v. Travelers Supreme Court of Ohio Decision  - Download Olympic Holding Co. v. ACE Limited Supreme Court of New Hampshire Decision  -
Continue reading...

Recent Insurance Related Legislation

California Senate Bill 119 (Introduced Feb. 2, 2009, Last Action May 5, 2009) This bill deletes the expiration date for existing law that prohibits the bringing of an action for statements made in bad faith against an insurer issuing professional liability insurance policies to health care providers unless the statement was made under a specified circumstance. Connecticut Senate Bill 212 (Introduced Jan. 21, 2009, Last Action May 5, 2009) This bill prohibits the cancellation fee for certain automobile liability insurance
Continue reading...

High Court Reasons that Global Umbrella Policy Does Not Drop Down

Flexsys America LP v XL Insurance Company Ltd [2009] EWHC 1115 (Comm) (20 May 2009) The policyholder maintained that it exhausted its $1M limits under a primary policy issued by XL in Ohio. It then claimed tan XL global policy, with limits of $25M and subject to U.K. law, should apply to cover remaining expenses and claims. The court found that the "drop down" of excess policy was subject to a determination of whether the primary policy would apply to the particular
Continue reading...

Policyholder’s Withholding Material Information Precludes Recovery

Southern Realty Mgmt, Inc. v. Aspen Specialty Ins. Co., et al. (N.D. Ga, April 28, 2009) The insurers contended that the policyholder violated the policy provisions when it concealed the sale of the subject damaged property on the proof of loss and refused to cooperate with insurers by turning over all sale documents. The court noted that under Georgia law, an insurer has a compelling interest in, and right to, an accurate proof of loss. Also, a policyholder may not
Continue reading...

D&O Policy Exclusion of Coverage for Claims Arising From a Contract Does Not Apply

S.J. Amoroso Construction Company, Inc. v. Executive Risk Indemnity, Inc. (9th  Cir.(Cal.), April 30, 2009) The underlying complaint alleged damages as a result of a third party’s misrepresentations that induced one party to contract with another. The theory of liability depended on the fact that the third party was not a party to the contract and had no liability under it. Therefore, the exclusion did not apply. By Richard J. Cohen and Carrie P. Appler  http://www.goldbergsegalla.com/attorneys/Appler.html http://www.goldbergsegalla.com/attorneys/Cohen.html
Continue reading...