Search Results

Your Results For :  Insurance and Reinsurance

Articles & Publications

12.20.18  Nevada Supreme Court Imposes Excess-Limits Liability on Insurer for Breach of Duty to Defend Despite No Bad Faith
10.22.18  A Bird’s Eye View of Potential Drone Risks
02.08.18  D&O and Professional Liability 2017 - A Year In Review
02.05.18  Key D&O And Professional Liability Trends Of 2017
11.21.17  NY Statute Governing Liability Policies “Issued or Delivered” in NY Applied To NY Insureds and Risks Though Policy Issued and Delivered Outside NY
08.24.17  Ninth Circuit Holds TCPA Claims Are Invasion of Privacy Claims
04.26.17  Third Circuit Curbs Insurers’ Asbestos Exposure
01.23.17  No Bad Faith Failure To Settle Where Insurer Refused Stipulated Judgment Potentially In Excess of Policy Limits Coupled With A Covenant Not To Execute Against The InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  California Supreme Court To Consider Whether a Primary Insurer With An “Other Insurance” Clause Can Enforce It Against A Primary Insurer Without One, Or Enforce A Limits Reduction ClauseOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Underlying Complaint Allegations Did Not Create Duty To Defend Under Additional Insured Coverage Where Entity Did Not Actually Meet Policy’s Additional Insured DefinitionOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Insurer Did Not Breach Any Duty Where No One Had Ever Satisfied Policy’s Self-Insured Retention And The Underlying Action Resulted In A Default Judgment Against The InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Unauthorized Use Of Trademarked Logo On Insured’s Website Not Covered Advertising InjuryOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  California Supreme Court To Consider Whether Contributing Excess Insurer Can Sue Primary Insurer For Unreasonably Rejecting Prior Settlement Demands When Case Settles Before JudgmentOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Insurer Held Liable For Bad Faith Refusal To Settle Despite Superfluous Exception In Proposed Release For The Insured’s Criminal Restitution LiabilityOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Employment-Related Practices Exclusion Precludes Duty To Defend Or Indemnify Insured Accused Of Negligent Hiring and SupervisionOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  D&O Insurer With No Duty To Defend Ordered To Produce Loss Reserve Information But Not To Answer Interrogatories Asking For Its Interpretation Of Policy Terms In The AbstractOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  Insured-vs-Insured Exclusion Bars Coverage for Action Against Corporation Brought By Minority Shareholders Who Were Also Former DirectorsOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  California Supreme Court Certifies Ninth Circuit’s Question: Is There An Accidental “Occurrence” For Purposes Of A Negligent Hiring And Supervision Claim Against The Insured That Arises From Bodily Injury Deliberately Caused By The Insured’s Employee?Originally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
01.23.17  A Known Construction Defect Left Uncorrected Is Not An Accidental “Occurrence”Originally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 11, 2017
11.18.16  Employees’ Claims For Reimbursement Of Business Expenses Is Not A Wage And Hour Violation
09.08.16  Louisiana Supreme Court Adopts Pro Rata Allocation of Defense Costs
09.06.16  California Supreme Court Clarifies When Brandt Fees May Be Considered In Determining If A Punitive Damages Award Is Unconstitutionally ExcessiveOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Finds It Cannot Decide Rescission Claim As A Matter Of Law Due To Discrepancy Between Witness Deposition Testimony and Subsequent ErrataOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Where Primary Cause Of Stone Floor Cracking Was Improperly Applied Mortar, Cost of Making Good Exclusions Barred Coverage Under Builder’s Risk Policies And Ensuing Loss Exception Did Not Restore Any CoverageOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Exclusion For Losses Caused By “Authorized Representatives” Was Not Ambiguous In The Context Of Losses Caused By Insured’s Payroll-Services AgentOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Rejects Insured’s Attempts to Compel Production of Post-Suit Claims Handling InformationOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Rules On The Measure Of Damages For Breaching The Duty To Defend A Mixed ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Rules That Intellectual Property Exclusion Does Not Bar Duty To Defend Patent-Holder For Allegedly Making False Accusations Of InfringementOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Rules That A State Civil Investigative Demand Is Not A “Claim,” And That A Contractual Liability Exclusion Does Not Apply To All ContractsOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  District Court Finds That Claims Handler Is Not A Proper Party To Insurance Dispute For Acts Allegedly Within The Course And Scope Of Her EmploymentOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Second District’s Fourth Division Takes A Side In The Split Over Whether An Excess Insurer That Contributes To An Excess Settlement Can Assert A Cause Of Action Based On A Primary Insurer’s Unreasonable Rejection Of Prior DemandsOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Although Gravamen Of Underlying Action Was Non-Covered Trademark Infringement, District Court Found Duty To Defend Based On Potential Covered Liability For Trade Dress Infringement In Insured’s AdvertisementsOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Provision Purporting To Make Primary CGL Insurer’s Defense Duty Vanish If A Defense Is Available From Other Insurance Held A Disfavored Escape ClauseOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith by Conditioning Its Acceptance of Policy Limit Demand on Release of InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals Addresses What The Word “Intentional” Means In A “Dishonest, Malicious, Fraudulent, Criminal Or Intentional” Acts ExclusionOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
09.06.16  Insurer Had No Duty To Defend Or Indemnify Claims Based On Unpaid WagesOriginally published in California Insurance Newsletter - Vol. 10, 2016
08.31.16  Insurer Is Not Required to “Drop Down” and Provide Coverage within Insolvent Insured’s Retention
08.26.16  Appellate Court Vindicates Insurers’ Position That Coverage Dispute Is Not A Core Bankruptcy Matter
05.20.16  Illinois Appellate Court Rejects Coverage for Blast-Fax Class Action Under the TCPA
04.01.16  Insured v. Insured Exclusion Bars Coverage for Liquidation Trustee’s Suit Against Officers
03.23.16  D&O and Professional Liability 2015 - A Year In Review
03.04.16  Troutman Sanders Secures Early Dismissal of Bad Faith Suit Over Coverage For Wage & Hour Claims
02.11.16  Ninth Circuit Rules No Duty to Defend Where Underlying Claims Were All Based on Allegations of Statutory ViolationsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  No Coverage for Suit Against Resort by Neighboring Homeowners for Allegations of Interference with Property RightsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  No Coverage for Trademark Infringement Under Slogan Infringement CoverageOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  California’s Mediation Privilege Statute Can Impact an Insurer’s Ability to Evaluate Coverage and Litigate Coverage MattersOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  Policy Reformation Count Dismissed by Northern District of CaliforniaOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  District Court Holds That a Carrier May Breach its Duty to Defend by Failing to Agree to Defend a Covered Action Prior to the Responsive Pleading DeadlineOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  Insured’s Motion to Stay Carrier’s Declaratory Relief Action Is Denied Where Court Found It Could Resolve the Coverage Dispute Without Reaching the Merits of the Underlying ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016 Newsletter
02.11.16  Insurer Not Bound by Additional Insured Endorsement Issued by Broker Because Broker Served as Agent of Insured, Not InsurerOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  Insurer’s Interpleader Violated Duty to Defend Where Funds Interpleaded Were in Excess of those Subject to Competing ClaimsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  Troutman Sanders Litigation Lawyers Author Chapter on Accountants' Liability
02.11.16  Court Finds Duty to Defend Despite Pollution Exclusion, Where the Possibility of a Sudden and Accidental Discharge of Contaminants Was DemonstratedOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.11.16  Duty to Defend Triggered Despite Prior Acts Exclusion Where Some of the Underlying Allegations Occurred After the Policy’s Inception DateOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - Vol. 9, 2016
02.09.16  Troutman Sanders Secures Ninth Circuit Victory for Houston Casualty Company
02.08.16  D&O and Professional Liability 2016 - A Year In Review
11.03.15  Contributions from Other Insurers May Satisfy the Insured’s Obligations as to Self-Insured Retention Provisions Where the Policy Does not Provide OtherwiseOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  California Courts Maintain Position that EPL Policies Afford No Indemnity Coverage for Wage and Hour ClaimsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Affiliated Carrier Dismissed From Action Because it did not Issue the Policy in QuestionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Professional Services Exclusion in a D&O Policy Barred Coverage for Underlying Claims for Failure to Render Payroll ServicesOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Relatedness of Claims is Not Properly Addressed on a Motion to Dismiss Where it Involves a Factual InquiryOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Amounts Incurred in Lawsuit Involving Multiple Claims Must Be Allocated Equally as Between Multiple Retentions Absent Evidence Supporting an Alternative AllocationOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Insured Not Entitled to Coverage for Third Party Loss Where Indemnity Policy’s Coverage Grants Require “Direct Loss”Originally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Claimant’s Assignee Unable to Pursue Breach of Contract Claim Against Carrier Because the Claimant Did Not Assert His Claim During the Policy PeriodOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Sealed, Unserved Complaint Not Considered a Claim First Made During the Policy PeriodOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  California Supreme Court Holds That California Insurance Code Section 520 Prohibits a Carrier From Denying Coverage Based on “Consent-to-Assignment” Clauses in its Policy if the Loss Happened Prior to the AssignmentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Insured Not Required to Plead Existence of a Within-Limits Settlement Demand in Order to State a Claim for Bad Faith Failure to SettleOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Insurer Satisfied Duty to Defend By Obtaining Dismissal of Counterclaim Without PrejudiceOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  California Insurance Law Review - 2015 Newsletter
11.03.15  California Supreme Court Holds Carriers Can Sue Cumis Counsel for Repayment of Excessive FeesOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
11.03.15  Chemical Discharge Exclusion Triggered by Insured’s 20-year Old Deposition TestimonyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Review - 2015
10.05.15  Continental Wins $2.4 Million Summary Judgment Ruling against Policyholder
08.14.15  Illinois Appellate Court Further Clarifies the “Eight Corners Rule” While Construing The Term “Collectible” As Applied To Contingent Coverage
08.11.15  California Supreme Court Allows Insurer to Seek Reimbursement of Excessive Legal Fees Directly from Cumis Counsel Under Narrow Facts of Case
07.15.15  Troutman Sanders’ Insurance Group Earns Accolades and Victories
06.03.15  Avoiding Arguments Regarding Waiver of the Right to Rescind: An Examination of California LawOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  E&O Carrier’s Duty to Defend Was Triggered because Allegations that the Insureds Mismanaged Debtor’s Trust Account Concerned Professional Services for OthersOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Wage and Hour Exclusion Barred Coverage for Underlying Wage and Hour Class Action Asserting Claims for Misrepresentation, California Labor Code Violations and Unfair CompetitionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Professional Services Exclusion Did Not Preclude Coverage for Misrepresentation Claim Against InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Court Refuses to Recognize the Claim File Privilege as Providing a Basis for Refusing to Produce Documents in an Insured’s Claim File during DiscoveryOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Counterclaim Asserted Against Insured in Underlying Environmental Cleanup Action Triggered Duty to DefendOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  California Insurance Law Review - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Court Stays Declaratory Relief Action Pending Resolution of the Underlying Action Based on a Finding that Application of Professional Services Exclusion Could Materially Impact the Underlying ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Insurer Did Not Breach any Duty by Settling Claims without Insured’s Consent and Prior to Appointing CounselOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  CGL Policy Did Not Afford Coverage for an Underlying Construction Defect Action because the Alleged Property Damage Was Discovered after the Policy Period and the Total Residential Construction Exclusion Was ImplicatedOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
06.03.15  Insurer’s Duty to Defend Did Not Arise until Insurer Was Provided with All Necessary Information to Determine the Existence of Coverage, and Carrier’s Right to Control the Defense Includes the Right to Appoint Counsel of Its Choosing and to Settle Claims without the Participation of the InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2015 Newsletter
04.16.15  Insurance Regulatory Cybersecurity Initiatives Gather Momentum
04.09.15  NAIC 2015 Spring Meeting Highlights
03.19.15  Illinois Supreme Court Holds that Captive Insurance Agent Owes Duty of Ordinary Care to Insured
03.16.15  California Federal Court Finds No Coverage for Settlement Reached Without Insurer’s Consent, Rejecting Insured’s Argument that it was Excused from Obtaining Consent
03.13.15  D&O and Professional Liability 2014 - A Year In Review
03.12.15  Under California Law, Absent Extraordinary Circumstances, Insurers Have No Obligation to Pay for Pre-Tender Fees and Costs under Duty to Defend or Reimbursement PoliciesOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Carrier Held to Have No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Insured Massage Therapist Against Claim of Sexual Assault Because the Assault Was Not Allegedly Performed Within the Therapist’s Scope of EmploymentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Court Holds That a Coinsurer’s Notice of a Claim Brought Against a Mutual Insured Qualified as a Valid Tender Despite Policy Provision Requiring the Insured Itself to Provide NoticeOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Insured v. Insured Exclusion Held Ambiguous With Regard to Claims by the FDIC as ReceiverOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Automobile Carrier Held not to Have Violated Its Duty to Settle Where it Offered Its Full Policy Limit in Settlement Less Than Three Weeks After Claim Was Submitted by the Attorney for the ClaimantOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Court Holds That an Insurer was Entitled to Seek Equitable Contribution from Another Insurer for a Portion of Defense and Settlement Costs That it Paid in Connection With Three Underlying Lawsuits Brought Against Their Mutual InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Payments by Other Insureds Held to Satisfy Policy’s SIR EndorsementOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Insurance Broker Was Not Liable for Failing to Timely Tender an Insured’s Claim Because the Policy Would Not Have Covered the Claim Even if it Were Timely TenderedOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Court Dismisses Insurers’ Coverage Action Against Their Insureds for Allegedly Failing to Consent to Insurers’ Choice of Counsel, Because the Insurers’ Claims Were Not Ripe at the Time They Were FiledOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Recovery from General Liability Carrier Held to Reduce Underinsured Motorist Coverage and to Eliminate Any Obligation on the Part of the Injured Party’s Automobile CarrierOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.1215  Prior Publication Exclusion Eliminates Coverage Under a General Liability Policy’s Advertising Injury Coverage for Trademark Infringement ClaimOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
03.12.15  Acts Held to Constitute Intentional Intimidation and Harassment in an Underlying Action do not Constitute an “Occurrence” Under Insured’s Homeowner’s PolicyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2014-15 Newsletter
01.28.15  Seven Things Your Company Can Do To Celebrate Data Privacy Day
01.14.15  Illinois Appellate Court Clarifies Duty to Defend Standards
12.16.14  Under California Law, an Insurer’s Duty to Defend is Based on Facts Alleged in the Complaint and Facts Otherwise Known by the Insurer; Speculation and Arguments are not Relevant to the Duty to Defend AnalysisOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  Automobile Policy’s Exclusion for Bodily Injury to “an Insured” Held Unenforceable and Against Public Policy With Regard to Injuries Sustained by a Non-Relative of the Named InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  CGL Policy with Specific “Other Insurance” Clause Ruled Excess Over Auto Policy for Claim Arising out of Automobile AccidentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  CGL Policy’s “Employment-Related Practices Exclusion” Held to Preclude Coverage for Lawsuit Involving Claims of Sexual Harassment and False ImprisonmentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  The Ninth Circuit Finds Carrier Had Duty to Defend Based on Potential that Erosion to Land Could Have Occurred During its Policy PeriodOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  Court Holds that the Insured’s Per-Claim Self-Insured Retention Applies on a Per-Home Basis Based on Language in Policy’s SIR EndorsementOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
12.16.14  Intentionally Striking Another Individual Ruled Not an “Occurrence” and Therefore Uncovered Even if Done in Self-DefenseOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2014 Newsletter
10.07.14  Court Holds That An Excess Insurer Cannot Maintain An Action For Equitable Subrogation Against A Primary Insurer Unless The Underlying Case Results In A Final Excess JudgmentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
10.01.14  Illinois Appellate Court Clarifies Application of Policy Consent Provisions and the Method for Analyzing the Reasonableness of an Insured’s Settlement
09.10.14  Insurer Permitted To Pursue Breach of Contract Claim Against Insured Based On The Insured’s Failure To Accept Appointed Defense Counsel In An Underlying ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Illinois Appellate Court Applies Estoppel Doctrine to Additional Insured Defense
09.10.14  D&O Policy With “Other Insurance” Language Contained In The Insuring Agreement Ruled Excess Over D&O Policy With Such A Provision In A Separate SectionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Feng Shui Consulting Fees Not Covered Because Those Fees Were Not “Necessary” And Did Not Constitute “Direct Physical Loss or Damage To Covered Property”Originally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Employment Discrimination Claim Was Excluded By An Intentional Acts Exclusion, But That Exclusion Did Not Render The Policy’s Coverage IllusoryOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Prior Publication Exclusion Bars Coverage For Trademark Infringement Action Because The Insured Published The Advertisement Before Policy InceptedOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Court Holds That Alleged Private Nuisance Did Not Constitute An “Occurrence” Under Homeowner’s PolicyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Court Holds An Insured May Assert A Cause of Action for Elder Abuse Against An Insurance Company Based On Denial Of Policy BenefitsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  Court Holds That A Blanket Additional Insured Endorsement Amending Policy’s “Other Insurance” Clause Did Not Make The Coverage Under That Policy Excess To The Additional Insured’s Own PolicyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
09.10.14  California Courts Continue To Narrowly Interpret California Civil Code § 2860 In Disputes Over Cumis Counsel FeesOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Summer 2014 Newsletter
08.15.14  Central District of California Holds that Insureds May, in Certain Circumstances, Appoint Multiple Defense Firms when Carrier’s Position Creates a Conflict of Interest
07.06.14  Insurer Held Not Liable for Losses Arising from the Insureds’ Alleged Ponzi Scheme Because Coverage Was Precluded By California Insurance Code Section 533
06.11.14  Central District of California Denies Insurer’s MSJ On the Basis That There Was an Issue of Material Fact as to Whether an Alleged Failure to Construct a Home in Accordance With the Residential Community’s CC&Rs Constituted an “Occurrence”Originally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  California Court of Appeal Holds Adjusters May Be Sued For Negligent Misrepresentations Made Within the Course and Scope of Their EmploymentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  California Court of Appeal Holds That a CGL Policy’s Coverage for Products Liability Applies Because Food Truck Fell Under “Mobile Equipment” Exception to an “Auto” ExclusionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Southern District of California Holds that Professional Liability Carrier Breached Its Duty to Defend Because the Underlying Action Alleged Both Non-Covered Professional Services and Potentially Covered Professional ServicesOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Eastern District of California Finds Policy Covering “Hired” and “Borrowed” Automobiles Does Not Cover Automobiles Driven By the Insured’s Contractual PartnersOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  When an Additional Insured Is the Party Seeking Coverage, Courts Must Resolve Ambiguities in a Manner Consistent With the Objectively Reasonable Expectations of the Additional InsuredOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Insurer Held Not Liable for Losses Arising from the Insureds’ Alleged Ponzi Scheme Because Coverage Was Precluded By California Insurance Code Section 533Originally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Eastern District of California Finds Policy Covering “Hired” and “Borrowed” Automobiles Does Not Cover Automobiles Driven By the Insured’s Contractual Partners
06.11.14  District Court Holds that an Insurer’s Claim for Equitable Subrogation Against an Insured’s Co-Defendant Failed Because the Insurer Did Not Claim the Co-Defendant Caused the Underlying Damage at IssueOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Trial Court Finds Claim for Bad Faith May Survive a Motion to Dismiss Despite Failure to Properly Plead Claim for Breach of ContractOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  The Central District of California Holds that an Invasion of Privacy Exclusion Found in a D&O Policy Barred Coverage for a Suit Alleging Violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection ActOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  CGL Carrier’s Duty To Defend Was Triggered Where Non-Professional Work Was Alleged and, Therefore, the Professional Services Exclusion Did Not Apply to Remove All Possibility of CoverageOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Insurer Required to Show Prejudice Because the Reporting Requirement in the Policy Conditions Did Not Transform the Claims-Made Policy Into a Claims-Made-and-Reported PolicyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  Insurer Had No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Trademark Infringement Claim Because It Fell Within the Scope of an Intellectual Property ExclusionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
06.11.14  California Insurance Law Quarterly - Spring 2014 Newsletter
04.01.14  Troutman Sanders Wins Insurance Coverage Dispute in California Federal Court Proving that Crime Really Doesn’t Pay
03.27.14  D&O and Professional Liability 2013 - A Year In Review
03.21.14  The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: An Overview of the Law and Coverage-Related Issues
03.06.14  The Eastern District of California Holds That A Carrier May Have An Affirmative Duty To Attempt to Settle A Claim Against The Insured When It Is Presented With A Reasonable Settlement OpportunityOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  Insurers Had No Duty to Indemnify Liability Associated With Willful Trade Dress InfringementOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  Policy Requiring a Carrier to Investigate and Defend “Suits” Does Not Require It to Investigate and Defend Claims That Have Not Ripened Into LitigationOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  California Court of Appeal Holds That A Carrier Generally Has No Duty To Settle In The Absence Of A Within-Limits DemandOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  An Insurer Can Potentially Be Liable to a Judgment Creditor for Bad Faith, Breach of Contract, and Punitive Damages for the Refusal to Pay an Arbitration Award That Was Issued Against the Insured and Confirmed by a State CourtOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  California Courts Continue Carefully to Review and Apply Claims-Made-And-Reported Provisions As DraftedOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  An Insurer Had No Duty to Defend or Indemnify Its Insureds in a Wage & Hour Class Action Under an Employee Benefit Liability Endorsement Found in a CGL PolicyOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  Cause of Action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty Seeking Only Injunctive Relief and Punitive Damages Does Not Trigger A Carrier’s Duty To Defend Under A Policy That Provides A Duty To Defend Against Claims Seeking “Damages” Due To A “Wrongful Act”Originally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
03.06.14  After Establishing That It Did Not Have A Duty To Defend, Insurer Was Entitled to Reimbursement From The Insured of Previously Paid Defense CostsOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Winter 2013-14 Newsletter
02.27.14  New York Appellate Court Rejects Privilege Claim on Insurer Outside Counsel Materials
11.25.13  California Supreme Court Finds that Violations of the Unfair Insurance Practices Act Can Form the Basis of a UCL ClaimOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Bad Faith Liability Cannot Be Premised On Breach of a Reformed Contractual Term When the Alleged Breach Occurs Prior to the ReformationOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Commercial Building Owner’s Policy Did Not Clearly Limit Loss of Rents Coverage to Instances Where a Signed Lease Was Already in Effect at the Time of Physical DamageOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Carrier Limited to “Modest” Attorney’s Fees Awards in Federal Interpleader ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  California Court of Appeal Clarifies Law on a Carrier’s Duty to SettleOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Insurer Has No Duty to Pay for Independent Counsel and May Reassert Its Right to Control the Defense When the Insurer Withdraws the Reservation of Rights Triggering the Insured’s Right to Independent CounselOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Carrier Held to Have No Duty to Defend Lawsuit Involving a Negligence Claim Because That Count Was “Inseparably Intertwined” With a Claim for Non-Covered, Intentional ConductOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Insurer’s Reservation of Rights Does Not Entitle Insured to Independent Counsel Absent an Actual Conflict of InterestOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Insurer Could Not Move Forward with a Declaratory Relief Action Against Its Insured When The Same Issues Would be Adjudicated in the Underlying ActionOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Extended Reporting Period Held to Apply Only to Claims First Made During That Period and Not Claims Made During the Original Policy PeriodOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  No Coverage for Policyholder for a Plaintiff’s Attorneys’ Fees Where the Lawsuit Did Not Allege a “Wrongful Act”Originally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.25.13  Excess Carrier Could Not Seek Reimbursement from the Primary Insurer Based On Its Rejection of a Claimant’s Settlement Offer Within Its Primary Limits Because There Was Not a Final Excess JudgmentOriginally published in California Insurance Law Quarterly - Fall 2013 Newsletter
11.22.13  Virginia Bureau of Insurance Encourages Health Insurers to Extend Coverage
11.14.13  Washington Appellate Court Enforces Strict Exhaustion Language in Excess Directors and Officers Liability Policies
10.31.13  Extended Reporting Period Held to Apply Only to Claims First Made During That Period and Not Claims Made During the Original Policy Period
10.14.13  Virginia Bureau of Insurance Issues Final Report on Long-Term Care Insurance Premium Rates
10.08.13  California Court Holds No Affirmative Duty to Settle Based Solely on the Likelihood of an Excess Judgment
09.04.13  9th Circuit Determines that EPA Letters Trigger Insurer’s Duty to Defend
06.28.13  Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Victory for Insurer in $5 Million Post-Judgment Interest Coverage Dispute
06.21.13  Potential Conflicts of Law Require Illinois Courts to Conduct a Choice-of-Law Analysis
06.14.13  Breach of Duty to Defend Precludes Reliance on Policy Exclusions in Indemnity Context
06.11.13  New York Court of Appeals Holds that “Disgorgement” May be Indemnifiable
04.05.13  California Federal Court Finds No Coverage Under Banker’s Bond for Loss Related to the Wholesale Lender’s Fraudulent Mortgage Loans
04.03.13  Minnesota Federal Court Upholds Defending Insurer’s Contribution Rights Against Fronting Insurer
03.13.13  The “Loss of Chance” Doctrine in Medical Malpractice Cases
03.07.13  D&O and Professional Liability 2012 - A Year In Review
02.28.13  California Court Denies Coverage Under D&O Policy for Claim Arising From the Offering of Securitized Mortgages
02.26.13  Illinois Court Finds No Coverage for Village Based on Policies’ Absolute Pollution Exclusions
02.15.13  Washington Supreme Court Holds That Binding Arbitration Clauses in Insurance Contracts Are Unenforceable
01.31.13  Year in Review – Troutman Sanders Insurance Practice Boasts Significant Victories in 2012
01.08.13  Illinois Supreme Court Decision Could Curtail Ability of Asbestos Claimants to “Forum Shop” in Illinois
12.07.12  Duke de Haas “blogs” from the NAIC meetings in National Harbor, Maryland
11.30.12  New York Court of Appeals Finds That Consensual Sexual Relationship Constitutes Malpractice
10.29.12  Troutman Sanders Obtains Dismissal in Large Professional Liability Coverage Dispute
10.10.12  Ninth Circuit Amends Du v. Allstate Opinion: Declines to Determine Whether an Insurer Has an Affirmative Duty to Settle under California Law
10.08.12  Latest Development on the Unclaimed Property Front for Life Insurers: West Virginia State Treasurer Files Ten Lawsuits against Life Insurers
09.17.12  Retail Ventures Decision Is Another Example of Ongoing Efforts to Determine How Insurance Applies to Cyber Attacks
08.31.12  Seventh Circuit Emphasizes Limited Scope of the Mend-the-Hold Doctrine
07.17.12  D&O and Professional Liability 2011 | A Year In Review
06.05.12  Florida Supreme Court Eradicates Common Law "Bad-Faith" Cause of Action
06.04.12  California Court of Appeal: An Insured’s Refusal to Pay Amounts Due Under a Contract Is Not a “Wrongful Act”
04.17.12  Illinois Court Grants Summary Judgment To Insurer In Post-Judgment Interest Coverage Dispute
04.13.12  Troutman Sanders’ Win: Seventh Circuit Issues Significant “No-Loss” Decision and Clarifies the Mend-the-Hold Doctrine
03.08.12  Duke de Haas “blogs” from the NAIC meetings in New Orleans, LA
03.01.12  Delaware Courts Find “Related Claims” Provision and Misrepresentations in Application Bar Coverage for Suit
02.16.12  Health Benefit Exchange Ship Runs Aground on Political Realities in Virginia
02.08.12  4th Circuit Limits Insurer’s Liability for Lead Poisoning
12.27.11  Ninth Circuit Finds Wage & Hour Claim Does Not Involve “Employment Practices Wrongful Acts”
12.27.11  Troutman Sanders Wins Major Insurance “Bad Faith” Case in Mississippi
12.15.11  Eighth Circuit Finds that $56 Million Stipulated Judgment Did Not Constitute “Loss” Under D&O Policy
11.22.11  California Court Enforces Allocation Provision in Lieu of “Reasonably Related” Standard
11.18.11  Securities Action Plaintiff Required to Identify Confidential Informants
11.16.11  Plaintiffs With Variable Claims in ERISA Lawsuit Denied Class Certification
10.31.11  Life Insurance Industry Facing Multi-Pronged Investigations
10.25.11  Illinois Appellate Court Provides Divergent Views on Enforceability of Pollution Exclusions
10.20.11  Second Circuit Adopts Moench Presumption of Prudence in ERISA Litigation
10.13.11  Pollution Exclusion Enforced by Madison County, Illinois Court
09.20.11  Ohio Federal Court Applies Exhaustion Language Against Goodyear
09.07.11  D&O and Professional Liability 2010 | A Year In Review
08.31.11  Rule Changes by Virginia State Corporation Commission Permit Unprecedented Access to Staff-Held Information
08.17.11  New York AG Expands Life Insurance Industry Probe
07.21.11  Virginia's Promotion of Competition and HHS' Notices of Proposed Rulemaking on Health Benefit Exchanges
03.31.11  Insurance Practice Shortlisted for the Chambers USA Awards for Excellence 2011
10.24.10  Eastern District of Oklahoma Enforces Medical Professional Services Exclusion
05.07.10  Insurance & Reinsurance 2009 | A Year In Review
02.24.10  Indiana Court of Appeals Affirms Summary Judgment on Late Notice in Favor of Insurers
02.08.10  Insurers Prevail Before Nebraska Supreme Court in Environmental Coverage Dispute
01.29.10  Texas District Court Applies Eight Corners Rule to Duty to Pay Policy
01.20.10  Recent Illinois Insurance-Related Opinions Part 1 - Target Tender
01.20.10  Recent Illinois Insurance-Related Opinions
01.20.10  Recent Illinois Insurance-Related Opinions Part 4 - Target Tender; Waiver
01.20.10  Recent Illinois Insurance-Related Opinions Part 3 - Coverage for Qui-tam Suits
01.20.10  Recent Illinois Insurance-Related Opinions Part 2 - Section 155
05.13.09  Chinese Drywall Update
05.05.09  Pennsylvania Supreme Court Declines to Extend Prejudice Requirement to a Claims-Made Policy’s Notice Provision
04.08.09  Delaware Supreme Court Rules That Directors Did Not Breach Duty of Loyalty in Approving $13 Billion Merger
03.18.09  Court Declares Complete Victory For Insurers In Exhaustion Trial
03.16.09  California Supreme Court Addresses Key Issues Involving Sudden and Accidental Exception to Pollution Exclusion
03.09.09  Delaware Chancery Court Dismisses Claims for Breach of Fiduciary Duty in Connection with Subprime Exposure in Citigroup Derivative Action
03.05.09  Chinese Drywall
03.04.09  Court Dismisses Congoleum Bankruptcy, Harshly Criticizing Plan Proponents
03.04.09  D&O and Professional Liability Update 2008: A Year in Review
02.24.09  Tenth Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment on Loss Causation Grounds, Emphasizes Strict Loss Causation Requirements in Securities Fraud Actions
01.27.09  State of Rhode Island Ordered to Reimburse Lead Pigment Defendants for Abatement Examiners' Costs in State's Unsuccessful Public Nuisance Suit
12.04.08  Bad Faith - Washington Supreme Court Holds That An Insurer Can Be Held Liable For Bad Faith Even In The Absence Of A Duty To Defend, Indemnify Or Settle
11.04.08  Bad Faith - Eleventh Circuit Applies Florida Law And Rejects Bad Faith Action By Excess Insurer Against Underlying Insurer
08.27.08  Bad Faith - Second Circuit Holds That Excess D&O Carriers’ Refusal To Consent To Settlement Constituted Breach Of Duty Of Good Faith
08.21.08  August 2008 Immigration Update
08.15.08  D&O Liability - Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Securities Fraud Suit With Prejudice For Failure to Plead Loss Causation, Scienter, and Falsity
07.30.08  D&O Liability - Second Circuit Holds that Securities Fraud Suit Against Company Can Survive Absent Adequate Allegations of Scienter As to Any Named Individual Defendant
07.28.08  Bad Faith - Federal Court Rejects Negligence Cause Of Action Against Insurer Under Oklahoma Law
05.27.08  Bad Faith - “The Decline of the So-Called Doctrine of ‘Continuing Bad Faith,’” ABA Tort, Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Winter 2008)
05.27.08  Bad Faith - Fifth Circuit Holds Insurer Not Liable Under Mississippi Law For Bad Faith Refusal To Pay When It Offered Less Than Policy Limits Due To A Miscalculation Of Benefits Owed
05.08.08  D&O Liability - Seventh Circuit Holds that Failure to Seek Consent to Settlement Bars Coverage
05.02.08  D&O Liability - Fifth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of ERISA Stock Drop Lawsuit
04.09.08  D&O Liability - Court Denies Class Certification for Failure to Prove Loss Causation
03.28.08  Illinois Insurance - Illinois Supreme Court Upholds Fraud Exclusion in a First Party Property Policy
03.28.08  D&O Liability - Excess Insurance Not Implicated Where Underlying Insurer Failed to Exhaust
03.11.08  D & O Liability - Insured v. Insured Exclusion Bars Coverage for Receiver’s Lawsuit
03.11.08  Illinois Insurance - RDB Obtains Ruling By Northern District of Illinois Upholding Application of “Insured v. Insured” Exclusion to Fiduciary Liability Claim Brought Under ERISA
03.10.08  Bad Faith - Oregon Supreme Court Holds That 16-to-1 Punitive Damages Award In Bad Faith Action Violates Due Process
02.15.08  D&O Liability - California Supreme Court Rules That California Law Generally Requires Plaintiff In Derivative Action to Maintain Continuous Stock Ownership Throughout the Litigation
01.22.08  Bad Faith - Illinois Court Of Appeals Holds That One Excess Insurer May Bring A Bad Faith Claim Against Another Excess Insurer
01.18.08  D&O Liability - Supreme Court Rules That No Private Right of Action Exists Under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or Rule 10b-5 When Claimants Do Not Rely Upon Statements or Deceptive Acts of Defendants
12.07.07  Bad Faith - Colorado Court Of Appeals Holds Insurer Not Liable For Bad Faith Because It Has No Duty To Inform Insured That Statute Of Limitations Would Run
12.03.07  Illinois Insurance - Illinois Supreme Court holds that (a) the doctrine of horizontal exhaustion is not limited to continuous tort or long-tail claims; and (b) the Illinois doctrine of “targeted tender” does not supersede the Illinois doctrine of “horizontal exhaustion”
11.12.07  Illinois Insurance - Illinois Appellate Court Applies “Professional Services” Exclusion In General Liability Policy To Claim Of Negligent Hiring And Supervision Of A Professional
09.28.07  Illinois Insurance - Illinois Appellate Court Permits Liability Insurer To Recover Defense Costs Under A Restitution Theory
09.28.07  Illinois Insurance - Katrina Court Rejects Usual Policyholder Arguments For Ambiguity, Finds For Insurers On Flood Exclusion And Approves Illinois Law On “Plain and Ordinary Meaning” Of Flood Exclusion In Homeowner’s Policies
09.19.07  California Insurance - California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act Does Not Apply to Insurance and No Cause of Action Can Be Pursued Against Insurers Under This Act
09.18.07  Bad Faith - Ninth Circuit Vacates $10 Million Punitive Award Involving Disability Insurance Claim
09.17.07  D&O Liability - Florida Court Holds That Defending Insurers “Fostered Cooperation” of the Insureds and Thus Are Not Liable to Indemnify for Settlement Achieved Without Insurers’ Consent
09.04.07  D&O Liability - District Court Dismisses Antitrust Claims in Insurance Brokerage Multidistrict Litigation
08.23.07  California Insurance - Intentional Battery Committed By Insured Exercising a Mistaken Right to Self-Defense Triggers Insurer’s Defense Obligation
08.21.07  D&O Liability - Tenth Circuit Reverses Summary Judgment for Insurer on Rescission Claim
08.17.07  Bad Faith - Third Circuit Holds Insurer Liable For Bad Faith Even Though Insured’s Agent Canceled Policy Prior To Loss
08.03.07  Bad Faith - Sixth Circuit Rules That Excess Insurer May Bring Bad Faith Claim Against Primary Insurer Under Kentucky Law
08.02.07  D&O Liability - Seventh Circuit Discounts Allegations Attributed to Confidential Witnesses, Citing Tellabs
06.21.07  D&O Liability - U.S. Supreme Court Vacates and Remands Seventh Circuit’s Reversal of the District Court’s Grant of Tellabs, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss
06.14.07  Bad Faith - West Virginia Supreme Court Announces Rules Governing Discovery Of Reserves Information In Bad Faith Litigation
05.15.07  D&O Liability - Federal Court in North Carolina Denies Class Certification in Red Hat Securities Litigation
05.15.07  Bad Faith - Florida Appellate Court Rules That Third Party Bringing Bad Faith Claim Cannot Abrogate The Attorney-Client Privilege Held By Insurer And Insured
04.13.07  D&O Liability - Federal Court in New Jersey Dismisses Vioxx Securities Litigation With Prejudice on Statute of Limitations Grounds
04.03.07  California Insurance - Where No Duty to Defend Ever Existed, Insurer Was Not Obligated to Pay an Award of Attorneys’ Fees in the Underlying Action Under its Policies’ Supplemental Payments Provisions
03.27.07  Bad Faith - Southern District of New York Grants Motion to Dismiss Insured's Claims for Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Bad Faith, and Punitive Damages for Failure to State a Claim Under New York Law
03.27.07  Bad Faith - Kentucky Court Of Appeals Adopts New Standard To Govern Claim That Liability Insurer Acted In Bad Faith By Settling Suit Against Insured For Excessive Amount
03.27.07  California Insurance - An Insurer is Only Liable for a Single “Occurrence,” Where an Uninterrupted Event (Landslide) Causes Both Property Damage and Personal Injury Over Several Policy Periods
03.27.07  Bad Faith - Kansas Supreme Court Holds That A Claim For Failure To Settle May Not Be Brought Against An Insurer Until The Insured’s Liability Is Established
03.16.07  Bad Faith - Nevada Supreme Court Upholds Disqualification Of Insured’s Counsel In Bad Faith Action Against Insurer
02.26.07  Bad Faith - West Virginia Supreme Court Holds That No Claim For Excess Judgment Exists Where Insured Entered Into Assignment And Covenant Not To Execute Prior To Trial
02.20.07  Bad Faith - U.S. Supreme Court Issues Punitive Damages Decision in Philip Morris USA v. Williams
02.20.07  Bad Faith - Federal Court Holds That Insured Can Maintain Bad Faith Claim Under Rhode Island Law Against An Independent Claims Administrator
02.09.07  California Insurance - No Liability Coverage for Sender of Unsolicited Faxes
02.08.07  Illinois Insurance - First District Extends “Selective Tender” Rule to Excess Carriers
02.08.07  Illinois Insurance - Right to Jury Exists When Declaratory Judgment Involves Disputed Facts
01.23.07  California Insurance - Directors and Officers Liability Insurance Does Not Cover a Corporation’s Contract Debts
12.01.06  California Insurance - Insurer’s Obligation To Pay Costs Taxed Against Insured Does Not Extend To Attorneys’ Fees Awarded Based On A Finding Of Willful Misconduct
11.07.06  California Insurance - Non-Defending Insurer’s Motion To Intervene Following Insured’s Settlement Of Underlying Action Came Too Late
11.01.06  Bad Faith - Third-Party Bad Faith Cause of Action Not Precluded By Tendering Policy Limits Under Florida Bad Faith Statute Prior to Excess Judgment
10.25.06  California Insurance - Insurer Has No Duty To Defend Lawsuit Where, Despite The Legal Theories Asserted, The Claims Arise Out Of Non-Covered Activities
09.11.06  Bad Faith - Sixth Circuit Holds That Insurer's Insistence on Overly Broad Release Prior to Paying Funds Pursuant to Judgement Could Constitute Bad Faith Under Kentucky Law
09.11.06  Bad Faith - California Court of Appeal Refuses To Permit Bad Faith Class Action
08.21.06  Bad Faith - Ohio Court of Appeals Affirms Dismissal of Bad Faith Claim and Raises Sua Sponte Possibility of Sanctions Against Plaintiffs
08.21.06  Bad Faith - Federal Court Holds That No Bad Faith Action Exists Under Pennsylvania Law Where Insurer Settles Within Policy Limits Before Entry of Excess Judgment Against Insured
08.02.06  California Insurance - Without An Excess Judgment, An Excess Insurer Has No Equitable Subrogation Rights Against A Primary Insurer That Fails To Settle Within Its Limits
08.02.06  California Insurance - Insurer’s Right to Equitable Contribution for Settlement Amounts from a Non-Participating Insurer Only Requires Prima Facie Proof of a Potential for Coverage, Not Actual Coverage
08.02.06  Bad Faith - Indiana Court of Appeals Holds That Trial Court Abused Discretion by Refusing Protective Order in Bad Faith Litigation
07.12.06  California Insurance - Assignee of Insured’s Bad Faith Claim Against Insurer is Entitled to Recover Attorneys’ Fees Incurred in Pursuing Policy Benefits
07.12.06  Bad Faith - Assignee of Insured’s Bad Faith Claim Against Insurer is Entitled to Recover Attorneys’ Fees Incurred in Pursuing Policy Benefits
06.26.06  California Insurance - An Insurer is Not Required to Notify Additional Insureds of Policy Cancellation Where a Premium Financing Lender Cancels the Policy Pursuant to Its Agreement With the Insured
06.06.06  California Insurance - “Genuine Dispute” Over Insured’s Misrepresentations During Insurer’s Claim Investigation Bars Bad Faith Liability Based on Insurer’s Subsequent Denial of Coverage
05.16.06  California Insurance - Insured Cannot “Split” Breach of Contract and Bad Faith Cause of Action Against Insurer
05.05.06  Bad Faith - Federal District Court Addresses Use of Videotaped Deposition Excerpts by Plaintiff in Bad Faith Trial
05.05.06  Bad Faith - Federal District Court Holds That Utah Law Bars Punitive Damages in a First-Party Bad Faith Action
05.05.06  Bad Faith - Second Circuit Holds that Insurer Did Not Act in Bad Faith By Refusing to Agree to a Settlement That Granted Plaintiffs the Right to Pursue a Declaratory Judgment Action Against the Insurer
03.17.06  California Insurance - Material Misstatements in Financial Statements Warrant Rescission of Directors and Officers Liability Policy, Even as to "Innocent" Insureds
03.09.06  California Insurance - Insurer Has No Tort Liability For “Negligent Claim Investigation” Absent Coverage
02.28.06  Bad Faith - District Court Holds That Federal Jurisdiction Is Not Exclusive for Claim Against Insurer Involved in National Flood Insurance Program
02.28.06  Bad Faith - Hawaii Supreme Court Holds That Insurer May Be Liable for Bad Faith Claim Handling Even if Relevant Policy Excludes Coverage
02.27.06  California Insurance - Directors and Officers Liability Coverage Does Not Include Breach of Contract Claims Against Condo Association
02.08.06  Bad Faith - Federal Court Rejects Automatic "Directed Verdict" Rule Under Iowa’s First-Party Bad Faith Law
02.08.06  Bad Faith - Federal Court Allows Removal of Bad Faith Claim in Litigation Pending for More Than One Year
01.05.06  Bad Faith - Fifth Circuit Holds That State Law Bad Faith Claims Arising Out of Policies Issued Under the National Flood Insurance Program Are Preempted by Federal Law

News Releases

07.09.18  Troutman Sanders Expands Litigation and Insurance and Reinsurance Practices with Addition of Five Premier Partners in DC, New York and Orange County
01.02.18  Troutman Sanders Elects Nine New Partners
08.15.17  Best Lawyers in America Recognizes Troutman Sanders Lawyers in National, Regional Rankings
06.26.12  Jonathan A. Constine Joins Troutman Sanders’ Washington, D.C. Office

Press Coverage

11.27.18  Drone Use Presents New Risks
02.14.17  Judge: Claims Alleging Wrongful Antitrust, Monopolizing Conduct Are Related
02.08.17  Judge: Fraud Exclusion Permits Insurer To Pursue Coverage Suit Against Insured
01.04.16  Potential SAFETY Act Issues For Insurers To Consider
10.21.16  Insurers' Biggest Headaches: Business Interruption Claims
10.21.16  Axis Says Tilton Bought $5M Policy While Under SEC Scrutiny
07.29.16  Excess Policy Terms Set Exhaustion Method, Ill. Judge Says
07.05.16  Chicago Agency Loses Bid For Construction Injury Coverage
04.15.15  Law360 Names Attys Who Moved Up the Firm Ranks In Q1
02.24.15  Union Pacific, BNSF Can’t Duck Oxbow's Price-Fixing Suit
09.05.14  Appeal to Plant Insulation Plan Order Junked
08.01.14  Fellows Provide Access to Justice
06.30.14  Insurers disclaim coverage for lawsuit alleging FCRA violations
06.27.14  RE Ponze Scheme Suits Excluded From Policy, Insurer Says
10.18.12  Chicago and Washington partners have insurance articles published
10.31.11  Troutman Sanders team on Little Lady Foods Inc. v. Houston Casualty Co.
09.15.11  Washington attorneys garner ink in Texas Insurance Law & Litigation
01.12.11  Washington partners pen two part article on D&O insurance