PropertyCasualtyFocus

  • All Topics
  • Contributors
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

New Jersey Appellate Court Keeps “Running Spigot” Open on Allocation of Defense Costs Under Non-Eroding-Limit Fronting Policies (and Other Spooky Tales from the Towers of Coverage Past)

October 23, 2014 by John C. Pitblado

Picture of a Running Spigot

New Jersey's Appellate Division recently affirmed each of several challenged rulings rendered in a long-running coverage dispute between plaintiff IMO Industries and its many historical insurers arising from asbestos exposure-related injuries dating back to the 1940's. IMO sought declaratory and other relief to establish IMO's and the defendant insurers' respective obligations for defense and indemnity of underlying personal injury lawsuits against IMO. Plaintiff IMO ... Keep Reading »

My Advice? Pay Me!

October 16, 2014 by Stephen J. Bagge

Picture of the Statue of Edinburgh's famous faithful fido

Shopping for insurance can raise hard questions:  How much coverage do I need?  What types of risk should be covered?  What must I do to get the maximum benefits allowed?  Policyholders who get the wrong answers often end up in litigation—claiming their homes were underinsured, their agents failed to obtain the coverage they requested, or they were tricked out of reimbursement for full replacement cost.  In many contexts, courts have shown a good deal of indulgence for ... Keep Reading »

Cut! Eighth Circuit Excludes Non-Board Member from CGL Coverage for “Directors”

October 9, 2014 by Patricia H. Thompson

Picture of Bert Glennon and John Ford on the set of Stagecoach

Directors and Officers liability policies are typically precise in defining the job descriptions of the individuals to whom they offer coverage.  Recently, in United Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Thompson, No. 13-2352 (8th Cir. July 11, 2014), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit had to decide whether the term "director," which was left undefined in a corporation's Commercial General Liability policy, could apply to a supervisory employee, whom one party ... Keep Reading »

Get Exhausted! The Tenth Circuit Schools an Excess Insurer on How to Preserve Subrogation Claims in a Settlement

October 8, 2014 by Scott C. Shine and Matthew Burrows

Picture of a Baby Seal

When I die, I want to be exhausted. –Bryan Cranston Claims against insured businesses sometimes implicate multiple liability policies issued by several different carriers, and it is sometimes prudent for some of those carriers to settle the underlying action, even if others are unwilling to contribute to the settlement. At that point, it is important for the settling insurer carefully to analyze the relevant coverage terms, before the structure of the settlement has ... Keep Reading »

You’re Not on the List: Failure to Name Names Knocks Lloyd’s Out of Federal Court

October 2, 2014 by Heidi Hudson Raschke

Picture of Lloyd's Coffee House by William Holland

It is impossible today to imagine a world without insurance.  Individuals can't buy houses or cars without insuring them against loss.  Businesses cannot operate without any number of coverages—against damage to their property and equipment, against interruptions to their operations and against liability to employees, customers and the world at large.  But ‘twas not ever thus.  Recently, in a dispute over whether a group of Lloyd's underwriters could establish diversity ... Keep Reading »

If it Races like a Tortoise: Connecticut Deconstructs a Policyholder

October 1, 2014 by John C. Pitblado and Robert D. Helfand

Picture of a Toy Race Track

From Zeno of Elea to the Washington Nationals, images of racing have ceaselessly troubled Western thought.  But as ancient metaphysics has given way to philosophy of language, the questions we ask ourselves have changed.  In Sonson v. United Services Auto. Ass'n  No. 35890 (Conn. Ct. App. Sept. 16, 2014), an automobile policyholder had to show that a "racing" exclusion did not apply, so he argued that Achilles could never overtake the tortoise if he was not "competing ... Keep Reading »

With Sewers Backing Up, Messy Damage Claims are On the Rise

September 25, 2014 by John C. Pitblado

Picture of Men Working in a Sewer

Andy crawled to freedom through five hundred yards of - - - smelling foulness I can't even imagine. Or maybe I just don't want to. Five hundred yards. The length of five football fields. Just shy of half a mile. –The Shawshank Redemption (1994) Many homeowners and other property insurance policies contain an exclusion to address one of the by-products of the increased frequency of severe weather: it bars coverage for property damage caused by "water which backs up ... Keep Reading »

Claims Handlers: It’s Time to Adjust Our Claims!

September 22, 2014 by Jonathan Sterling

Picture of Children Picketing

Many insurers have a longstanding practice of paying claims adjusters a set weekly salary, regardless of the number of hours they actually work.  The practice has support in federal labor regulations; the regulations expressly exempt claims adjusters from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), if their duties include discretionary and administrative activities such as interviewing witnesses, inspecting property damage, reviewing information for ... Keep Reading »

Leap of Bad Faith: TPAs May Be Sued for Aiding Their Own Actions

September 18, 2014 by Daniel G. Enriquez

Picture of a Contortionist

Insurers have a duty to process claims in good faith, but sometimes they farm the job out to third-party administrators (TPAs).  If the TPA fouls up, many states hold that the insurer is still liable—for its own breach of duty, even if a doctrine of vicarious liability does not apply.  The rule is summed up in the statement that the duty of good faith is not delegable; the insurer must either handle the claim in good faith or cause someone else to do so. But what ... Keep Reading »

Drive, He Said: When “Yes” Means “Don’t Shoot!”

September 17, 2014 by John W. Herrington

Picture of a Shotgun Shell Ejecting

Bad things can happen to innocent people, and sometimes the people responsible for them are judgment-proof.  When that happens—and when the perpetrator also has potential coverage under an automobile or homeowners policy—victims sometimes view the circumstances of their injury more generously; they describe them with words like "careless" and "negligent" in place of harsh, judgmental terms, such as "intentional" or "criminal." Something of this sort seems to have been ... Keep Reading »

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • …
  • 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

  • Seventh Circuit Affirms Broad Reading of CGL Policy’s “Radioactive Matter Exclusion” to Include EMF Radiation
  • Iowa Supreme Court Reaffirms Rule That Faulty Workmanship Is Not an Occurrence, Leaving Question of Statutory Fraud for Another Day
  • Florida District Court Orders New Trial After Jury Allowed to Hear Evidence on Claim Handling in Insurance Breach of Contract Claim

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