The Indiana Supreme Court, applying Indiana law, has held that an insured may be entitled to coverage for a ransom payment under a commercial crime policy if the circumstances of the attack “fraudulently caused” the insured to make the payment.
In a matter of first impression, a Kentucky appellate court held that the notice-prejudice rule does not apply to claims-made-and-reported policies. Darwin Nat’l Assurance Co. v. Kentucky State Univ., 2021 WL 1045716 (Ky. Ct. App. March 19, 2021).
Answering a certified question regarding a matter of first impression, the Nevada Supreme Court has held that an insurer is entitled to reimbursement of defense costs expended in defense of an insured where a determination is made that the insurer
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia, applying District of Columbia law, has held that there is no coverage for three lawsuits filed against an insured company because the lawsuits related to an email demand previously received
A Pennsylvania federal district court has held that a solo practitioner’s legal malpractice policy did not provide coverage for litigation arising out of several disputes with the attorney’s family because the attorney failed to comply with the policy’s notice provision,
Applying Delaware law, the Delaware Superior Court has held that a bankruptcy trustee’s fraudulent transfer claim constitutes a “Securities Claim” under a D&O policy. Verizon Commc’ns Inc. v. Nat’l Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa, 2021 WL 710816 (Del.
An Illinois appellate court has held that a professional liability insurer has a duty to defend suits seeking only declaratory and injunctive relief, even though the suits did not allege potentially covered damages. MHM Correctional Servs., Inc. v. Evanston Ins.
A California federal district court has ruled that an insurer could rescind a professional liability policy because its insured failed to disclose a customer dispute and potential claim in its application for coverage. Scottsdale Indem. Co. v. Sun Coast Gen.
In answering a certified question from the Ninth Circuit, the Arizona Supreme Court has held that, where the policy contains no duty to defend, the objective reasonableness of an insurer’s decision to withhold consent to settlement is judged from the
In a much-watched case, the Delaware Supreme Court has held that Delaware law governs a dispute regarding insurance coverage for a federal securities class action under D&O policies issued in California to a California company, where the company was incorporated
