PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Class Actions

May 15, 2020 by Carlton Fields

Over the last several months, there have been numerous lawsuits filed across the country by policyholders seeking business interruption insurance coverage for losses they claim are resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. In the last month, the new trend has been to file many of these claims as class actions. Several of the nation’s top plaintiff-side class action law firms have filed class action lawsuits seeking coverage for nationwide classes of policyholders. These ... Keep Reading »

Eleventh Circuit Weighs in on Allocated Verdict Form Procedure

May 8, 2020 by J. Kent Crocker

The Eleventh Circuit, in the matter of QBE Specialty Insurance Co. v. Scrap Inc., affirmed the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment in favor of QBE holding that there was no indemnity coverage for an underlying judgment where a non-allocated verdict form was used because the insured could not meet its burden of allocating between coverage and uncovered damages. Background QBE Specialty Insurance Co. issued a general commercial liability (GCL) ... Keep Reading »

Pennsylvania Court Ices General Reservation of Rights Letters: Insurers Must Specify “Emergent Coverage Issues”

May 1, 2020 by Roben West

In Selective Way Insurance Co. v. MAK Services Inc., the Superior Court of Pennsylvania reversed an insurer-favorable summary judgment after finding that its reservation of rights letter was insufficient. Following what appeared to be a standard slip-and-fall case, an insurer provided a defense under a reservation of rights to its insured — a snow and ice removal company. Astonishingly, the policy contained a snow and ice removal exclusion, barring coverage for bodily ... Keep Reading »

Eighth Circuit Enforces Contract Liability Exclusions to Bar Contract Claims, Regardless of Non-Contractual Cause of Action in Complaint

April 24, 2020 by Benjamin Stearns

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals recently decided a case, Russell v. Liberty Insurance Underwriters Inc., involving a dispute between the co-owners of a business and the widow of their deceased former partner. The widow sued the business’s surviving co-owners for breach of fiduciary duty for failing to apply a life insurance payout to the company to buy out her deceased husband’s shares pursuant to an agreement between the business owners. The co-owners submitted the ... Keep Reading »

Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina Join in Introducing Legislation That Would Force Insurers to Retroactively Cover COVID-19 Losses

April 17, 2020 by Christina Gallo and Charles W. Stotter

An increasing number of state legislatures have recently introduced measures that would require the insurance industry to bear much of the burden of business interruption and other losses due to the economic downturn brought on by the global COVID-19 pandemic. Louisiana, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina are among the latest states to join in proposing legislation that would require retroactive coverage for business interruption losses related to COVID-19, despite ... Keep Reading »

New York Court of Appeals Affirms GBL § 349 and § 350 Claims Must Have Widespread Effect on Consumers

April 17, 2020 by Nora Valenza-Frost

Twenty-five years ago, the New York Court of Appeals ruled that a claim under General Business Law section 349 does not lie when the plaintiff alleges only "a private contract dispute over policy coverage and the processing of a claim which is unique to the[] parties, not conduct which affects the consuming public at large." N.Y. Univ. v. Cont'l Ins. Co., 87 N.Y.2d 308, 321 (1995). Recently, the court was asked a different question: where an insurance contract, ... Keep Reading »

Are COVID-19 Business Interruption Claims Appropriate for a Coverage Class Action?

April 15, 2020 by Aaron S. Weiss

Over the last few weeks, a tsunami of lawsuits has been filed in many states alleging a variety of issues related to the global COVID-19 pandemic. The lawsuits have targeted a variety of industries, such as banking and financial services, travel and hospitality, and retail. The property and casualty insurance industry has also been in the news as likely hundreds of thousands of policyholders have faced shutdowns of their businesses. These policyholders have looked to ... Keep Reading »

A New Bad Faith Trend Emerges in COVID-19 Business Interruption Litigation

April 10, 2020 by Gregory Gidus

With governments across the world ordering the shutdown of restaurants, bars, and other “non-essential” businesses due to the COVID-19 pandemic, business interruption insurance claims are, not surprisingly, on the rise. While typical commercial property policies require “direct physical loss or damage” to property — a requirement that is unlikely satisfied by the shutdowns — policyholders are getting creative, alleging that the potential presence of the novel coronavirus ... Keep Reading »

Pennsylvania Federal Court Refuses to Dismiss Bad Faith Claim, Even Though Insurer Timely Made Demanded Payments

April 8, 2020 by Gregory Gidus

Empty Pockets

There have been more developments in Ironshore Specialty Insurance Co. v. Conemaugh Health System Inc., the case brought by Ironshore, as excess carrier, to seek reimbursement of amounts paid in an underlying medical malpractice settlement. While we previously reported that the court denied Conemaugh's (the insured's) motion to dismiss, the court has now also ruled that Conemaugh's counterclaims for bad faith can move forward, despite the fact that Conemaugh did not ... Keep Reading »

New York Federal Court Finds Insured’s Failure to Provide Notice of Subpoena Did Not Bar Coverage for Later Lawsuit

April 3, 2020 by Christina Gallo

Foreclosure Sign

Applying New York law, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that because a subpoena duces tecum previously issued to the insured by a post-judgment creditor of a non-insured entity was not a "claim" against the insured, the subpoena and a later-filed lawsuit against the insured could not qualify as "related claims" deemed first made when the subpoena was issued. The court also held that the "warranty exclusion" in the application for the ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • …
  • 48
  • Next Page »
Carlton Fields Logo
A blog focused on legal developments in the property-casualty industry by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Get Weekly Updates!

Send Me Updates!

Focused Topics

  • Additional Insured
  • Bad Faith
  • Business Interruption
  • Class Action
  • Construction/Builder’s Risk
  • Coronavirus / COVID-19
  • Cybersecurity
  • Declaratory Judgment
  • Duty to Defend
  • Environmental
  • Flood
  • Homeowners
  • Occurrence
  • Pollution/Pollutant
  • Property
  • Regulatory
  • VIEW ALL TOPICS »

Recent Articles

  • Third Circuit Holds Harassment Exclusion Bars Coverage for Sexual Assault Suit Under Pennsylvania Law
  • Tenth Circuit Interprets Excess Policy’s Definition of “Medical Incident” as Applying to the Injuries of One Single Person
  • Divided Ninth Circuit Finds Claimant’s Failure to Provide Medical Records Insulates Insurer From Bad Faith Failure to Settle

Carlton Fields

  • carltonfields.com
  • Practices
  • Industries
  • ExpectFocus Magazine

Related Industries/Practices

  • Insurance
  • Financial Lines Insurance
  • Property & Casualty Insurance
  • Financial Services & Insurance Litigation

About PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
© 2014–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Privacy Policy · Disclaimer

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Web Design by Espo Digital Marketing