Insurance Law

Recent Posts

When The Duty To Indemnify Is Broader Than The Duty To Defend
Posted on 17 Jul 2014 by Randy J. Maniloff

When it comes to coverage principles this one is as black as coal: the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify and if an insurer does not have a duty to defend, it does not have a duty to indemnify. But in Texas it can be a different story... Read More

Oregon Federal Court Holds No Duty to Pay Insured’s Appellate Costs
Posted on 3 Jul 2012 by Brian Margolies

Brian Margolies, Partner, Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP In its recent decision in City of Medford v. Argonaut Ins. Group, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86114 (D. Ore. June 21, 2012) , the United States District Court for the District of Oregon... Read More

New York Appeals Court Reverses Itself in K2 Investment Group Decision; Reaffirms Earlier Ruling in Servidone
Posted on 26 Feb 2014 by Duane Morris LLP

In a decision notable for several reasons [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ], the New York State Court of Appeals—the state's highest court—reversed itself in K2 Investment Group, LLC v. American Guarantee & Liability... Read More

How Broad Can The Duty To Defend Be? Really Broad
Posted on 19 Oct 2015 by Randy J. Maniloff

We all know that the duty to defend is broad. But just how broad? You’ll see. Bear with me here. This is worth reading – but it takes a lot of set up to get there. Zhaoyun Xia v. Probuilders Specialty Insurance Co., No. 71951-3-I (Wash... Read More

Ninth Circuit Holds Extrinsic Facts Triggered Duty to Defend
Posted on 4 Jun 2014 by Brian Margolies

In its decision in Burlington Ins. Co. v. CHWC, Inc ., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 3941 (9 th Cir. Mar. 3, 2014), [ enhanced version available to lexis.com subscribers ], the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, had... Read More