The United States District Court for the Central District of California, applying California law, has ruled that an insurer could rescind a policy issued after a homeowners association falsely claimed in its application that it had not had any claims
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, applying Alabama law, has held that an insurer could not invoke a policy’s consent-to-settle requirement to avoid liability because the insurer refused to participate in settlement negotiations despite having
The United States District Court for the Central District of California, applying Georgia law, has held that a claims-made policy did not provide coverage for an underlying lawsuit where the allegations in that lawsuit were first made in an email
A Kentucky federal court has held that an Insured v. Insured (IvI) exclusion that included an assistance exception precluded coverage for an entire lawsuit brought by both insureds and non-insureds and that no allocation was required. Tarter v. Navigators Ins.
There were several important developments impacting private investment funds in 2020. The SEC continued to prioritize this area of the capital markets, and it issued important rules and guidance impacting private funds and investment advisers. There also were two important
The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division has held that, under New York Insurance Law § 3420(a)(5), an insurer had no duty to defend or indemnify a personal injury action where the insured failed to provide notice of the claim
The United States District Court for the District of North Dakota has held that an insurer had no duty to defend a claim under a lawyers professional liability policy where the insured had prior knowledge that a claim might be
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, applying Arkansas law, has affirmed a ruling in favor of an insurer holding that there was no coverage for a claim made during one policy period but not reported until
Applying California law, the Ninth Circuit held that an excess insurer may challenge the allocation of an underlying settlement that resolves both an underlying claim against an insured and the insured’s coverage dispute with the primary insurer. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, applying Washington law, has held that an insured’s late notice of a claim bars coverage, rejecting arguments that (i) coverage applied because the prior and pending litigation provision did