Insurance Law

Recent Posts

Supreme Court Allows Discussion Of Insurance In Personal Injury Trial
Posted on 1 Sep 2015 by Randy J. Maniloff

You know the rule of evidence. Mentioning the availability of insurance, during a personal injury trial, is a big N-O. The rule is designed to prevent prejudice in the verdict, which might result if the jury is aware that an insurance company, and not... Read More

Vicarious Liability & Additional Insured Endorsement – Duty To Defend Based on Extrinsic Evidence
Posted on 23 Jun 2015 by Barry Zalma

Capital City Real Estate, LLC (“Capital City”) initiated a declaratory judgment action in the District of Maryland, seeking a declaration that Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London (“Underwriters”) were obligated to defend... Read More

SNR Denton on Nevels v. Deerbrook Insurance Co.: Expert Opinion in Bad Faith Case Admissible Only to Extent of Proper Basis
Posted on 15 Feb 2012 by William T. Barker

By William T. Barker, Partner, SNR Denton In Nevels v. Deerbrook Insurance Co., the court held an expert could testify that the insurer should have sooner offered the policy limit, but would not be permitted to testify that failure to do so was bad... Read More

Duty to Defend Triggered by Extrinsic Evidence Showing Insurer-Insured Relationship Existed
Posted on 24 Sep 2015 by Bullivant Houser Bailey PC

By Matthew E. Hedberg Last month, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued another decision that rejects a rigid application of the four-corners rule to determining the duty to defend. Previously, in Fred Shearer & Sons, Inc. v. Gemini Ins. Co. ,... Read More

SNR Denton on Nevels v. Deerbrook Insurance Co.: Expert Opinion in Bad Faith Case Admissible Only to Extent of Proper Basis
Posted on 15 Feb 2012 by William T. Barker

By William T. Barker, Partner, SNR Denton In Nevels v. Deerbrook Insurance Co., the court held an expert could testify that the insurer should have sooner offered the policy limit, but would not be permitted to testify that failure to do so was bad... Read More