Like insurance companies, plaintiffs’ class action attorneys do better when they know how to manage risk. Bringing a case to trial can involve an enormous investment of time and resources, and most firms can’t afford to do it if there’s a significant chance the defendant will not be entitled to liability coverage at the end of the day. For that reason, avoiding an early resolution of coverage issues can sometimes help an insurer negotiate a more favorable settlement. ... Keep Reading »
About John R. Hart
Impleading an Insured Proves “Mighty” Costly
Nuances of procedure can make a big difference in coverage disputes. In Danaher Corp. v. Travelers Indemnity Corp., No. 10 Civ. 0121(JPO)(JCF) (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2013), Travelers was required to pay the attorneys’ fees its insured had incurred filing a summary judgment motion in a case against Travelers. The ruling was not based on any impropriety in the insurer’s opposition to the motion, but rather, on the fact that Travelers had chosen to bring the insured into the ... Keep Reading »
If a Tree Falls, and No Court Held an Insurer Must Defend It, Is There a Breach of Contract?
A liability carrier claims a policy does not require it to defend a particular lawsuit. A federal district court agrees, and the insurer stops providing a defense. Five years later, a Court of Appeals reverses. Did the insurer breach its insurance contract? In what appears to be a case of first impression, a federal court in California has said “no,” because holding otherwise would “tip the scales too far in favor of the insured.” ... Keep Reading »
Ripeness Is All: Illinois Court Effectively Forbids Interlocutory Review of Arbitrators’ Discovery Orders
An Illinois Appellate Court has taken the next step in limiting the role of courts in insurance arbitrations. In Klehr v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co., No. 1-12-1843 (Ill. App. Ct., First Dist. Jan. 22, 2013), the plaintiff tried to obtain interlocutory review of an arbitrator’s discovery order by filing an action for a declaratory judgment. Addressing what it declared to be a question of first impression nationally, the Appellate Court dismissed the action, on the ... Keep Reading »
No, SIR: The Self-Insured Retains a Duty of Self-Defense
In the realm of liability insurance, the terms “deductible” and “self-insured retention” are often used interchangeably, but the two provisions have important differences. Among other things, “policies which are subject to self-insured retentions are ‘excess policies' which have no duty to indemnify until the self-insured retention is exhausted.” Century Indemnity Co. v. The Marine Group, No. 3:08-CV-01375-AC (D. Ore. Dec. 3, 2012), quoting Pacific Employers Ins. Co. ... Keep Reading »
Excess is Enough: Courts Decline to Expand Liability of Excess Insurers
Judicial opinions that purport to construe “the policy as a whole” are often bad news for insurers, but two recent decisions used that analysis to defeat plaintiffs with novel arguments for making their excess insurers liable for losses within the primary layer. Intel Corp. v. American Guarantee & Liability Insurance Co., No. 692, 2011 (Del. Sept. 7, 2012), arose out of antitrust litigation against the chip manufacturer, in which Intel paid more than $50 million ... Keep Reading »
Giving Short Rate: Farmers Potentially Liable for Unused Premium
Certain homeowners policies issued to California insureds by Farmers Group, Inc., contained the following cancellation terms: “(1) If you cancel this policy, we shall return the short rate unused share of the premium. (2) If we cancel this policy, we shall return the prorated unused share of the premium.” While indicating in this way that cancelling homeowners would receive something other than a “prorated” share, the policies did not state what the “short rate” share ... Keep Reading »
Slamming the Door: Innovative Procedural Gambits Fared Poorly Last Month
Procedural hurdles to maintaining cases in certain courts, or in a certain configuration of parties, can sometimes affect the outcome of litigation as much as the underlying merits. For a class action plaintiff (and especially for class counsel), the ability to resolve disputes over the defendant’s insurance coverage can be an immense boost in formulating a litigation and settlement strategy. For an insurer disputing coverage, access to federal court might be what makes ... Keep Reading »