SAN ANTONIO - An insured has shown that a claims adjuster and its employee violated provisions of the Texas Insurance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) and, thus, that those defendants were properly joined in an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit, a federal judge in Texas ruled Jan. 31 in granting an insured's motion to remand the action to state court (Kris Hospitality LLC, d/b/a Days Inn, v. Tri-State Insurance Co. of Minnesota, et al., No. 16-1229, W.D. Texas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13532).
BROOKLYN, N.Y. - A New York appeals panel on Feb. 1 found that an insurer has no duty to defend its insured under an insurance policy's directors and officers liability and entity liability coverage section, reversing a lower court's ruling against the insurer (Thomas C. Hansard, Jr. v Federal Insurance Co., No. 2014-09639, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 2nd Dept., 2017 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 629).
NEW YORK - A New York appeals panel on Feb. 2 affirmed a lower court's ruling in favor of a lawyers professional liability insurer in a dispute over coverage for underlying counterclaims against an insured for repudiation of a consulting agreement and legal malpractice (Law Offices of Zachary R. Greenhill P.C., et al. v. Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., et al., No. 650414/14, N.Y. Sup., App. Div., 1st Dept., 2017 NY Slip Op 00727).
TRENTON, N.J. - The New Jersey Supreme Court on Feb. 1 affirmed that an assignment of rights under numerous insurance policies issued between 1964 and 1986 is enforceable and valid because the assignment was made after the loss occurred and the insurers' obligation to insure the risk under the policies was not altered by the assignment to a successor company (Givaudan Fragrances Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., et al., No. 2015, 076523, N.J. Sup., 2017 N.J. LEXIS 121).
NEW ORLEANS - An insurer owes no duty to an employee of an insured for damages arising out of the employee's exposure to asbestos while employed by the insured, a Louisiana federal judge said Jan. 30 in granting the insurer's motion for summary judgment (Jesse Frank Sheppard v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., et al., No. 16-2401, E.D. La., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12011).
CAMDEN, N.J. - Finding that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether an insured submitted and an insurer received a proof of loss for the insured's Superstorm Sandy damage, a New Jersey federal judge on Jan. 31 denied the insurer's motion for summary judgment in the resulting coverage dispute (Gregg S. Balin v. New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Co., No. 14-5001, D. N.J., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12952).
NEW YORK - A federal bankruptcy judge in New York on Jan. 31 held that errors and omissions insurers violated the Barton doctrine by filing proceedings against MF Global Holdings Ltd. (MFGH) in Bermuda without obtaining leave from the bankruptcy court (In re: Mf Global Holdings Ltd., et al., Chapter 11, No. 11-15059, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy., 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 251).
NEW YORK - A Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Jan. 31 affirmed a lower court's confirmation of a number of international arbitration awards, finding that the arbitration umpire did not exhibit evident partiality to a retrocessional reinsurer (National Indemnity Company v. IRB Brasil Resseguros S.A., No. 16-1267, 2nd Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1686).
NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on Jan. 30 approved a stipulation and ordered a reinsurer sued by the liquidator of an insolvent insurer for breach of contract to post a security bond with the court (Roger A. Sevigny, the Commissioner of Insurance of the State of New Hampshire, as Liquidator of The Home Insurance Company v. Trygvesta Forsikring A/S, as successor in interest to Skandinavia Insurance Company Ltd., No. 16-cv-04874, S.D. N.Y.).
MIAMI - A Florida federal judge on Jan. 30 found that a directors and officers liability insurance policy's insured vs. insured exclusion precludes coverage for underlying claims against a condominium association insured and one of its board of directors arising from the installation of hurricane impact windows and doors, granting the insurer's motion for judgment on the pleadings (The Marbella Condominium Association, et al. v. RSUI Indemnity Co., No. 16-80987, S.D. Fla., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12363).
SOUTH BEND, Ind. - An insurer has no duty to defend or indemnify an insured against claims regarding damage from its glass-cleaning work to homeowners' windows and doors, an Indiana federal judge ruled Jan. 30 because the "damage to your work" exclusion eliminates coverage for claims of damage to the windows and doors and their replacement (The Celina Mutual Insurance Co. v. Daniel L. Gallas, et al., No. 14-1616, N.D. Ind., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12166).
ST. LOUIS - The Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 31 affirmed a district court's ruling that a policy's pollution exclusion clearly bars coverage for an underlying suit alleging bodily injury caused by an explosion at a natural gas facility (Hiland Partners GP Holdings LLC, et al., v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, PA, No. 15-3936, 8th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1696).
PHILADELPHIA - Although insureds have failed to plead their claim for breach of contract against their insurer, they have shown that the insurer's delay in taking part in a mandatory appraisal process was in bad faith, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled Jan. 30 in granting in part and denying in part the insurer's motion to dismiss (Charles Dagit, et al .v. Allstate Property and Casualty Insurance Co., No. 16-3843, E.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12124).
SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on Jan. 26 denied a disability insurer's motion for summary judgment after determining that an issue of fact exists as to whether the claimant was disabled pursuant to the policy's terms (Tracie D. Morgan v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Co., No. 16-5183, W.D. Wash.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11168).
INDIANAPOLIS - Because a financial institution insured's damages arose from improper overdraft charges and the fees that depositors incurred, they are excluded from coverage under its professional liability insurance policy, an Indiana federal judge ruled Jan. 26 (BancorpSouth Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 16-01871, S. D. Ind., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10817).
NEW HAVEN, Conn. - A Connecticut federal magistrate judge on Jan. 27 determined that an in camera review of a memo produced by an insurer involved in an asbestos coverage dispute must be conducted to determine if the memo contains any privileged information (ITT Corp. and Goulds Pump Inc. v. Travelers Casualty & Surety Co., No. 12-38, D. Conn.).
PITTSBURGH - Remand of an insurance breach of contract and bad faith lawsuit is not proper because the parties are sufficiently diverse and the plaintiffs' bad faith claim seeks damages in excess of the statutory limits, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled Jan. 30 in denying the plaintiffs' motion to remand and an insurer's motion to dismiss (Deborah A. Marks, et al. v. Utica First Insurance Co., No. 16-1671, W.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12096).
SCRANTON, Pa. - Insureds have failed to state a claim for relief in arguing that their automobile insurance provider acted in bad faith in delaying payment of their underinsured/uninsured motorist claims because they have not shown that the insurer's delay in making an offer or the offer amount were unreasonable, a federal judge in Pennsylvania ruled Jan. 27 (Thomas and Colleen Meyers v. Protective Insurance Co., No. 16-1821, M.D. Pa., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11338).
ANNAPOLIS, Md. - The Maryland Court of Appeals on Jan. 27 affirmed the Court of Special Appeals' holding that a nonprofit insured did not cause actual prejudice to an insurer by providing late notice of a claims that it committed criminal acts in prosecuting a lawsuit against the owner of Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus (National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pa. v. The Fund for Animals Inc., No. 18, September Term, 2016, Md. App.; 2017 Md. LEXIS 63).
NEW YORK - The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 27 affirmed that two insurers in an environmental contamination coverage dispute did not waive their right to assert a late-notice defense because the insured's notice of the underlying environmental claims was not timely (Travelers Indemnity Co., et al. v. Northrop Grumman Corp., et al., No. 15-3117, 2nd Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1471).
SYRACUSE, N.Y. - An insurer asked a federal court in New York on Jan. 26 to keep certain documents sealed, including communications about an insured's asbestos claims between its employees and its in-house counsel (Utica Mutual Insurance Company v. Munich Reinsurance America, Inc., No. 12-cv-00196, and Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. v. Utica Mutual Insurance Company, No. 13-cv-00743, N.D. N.Y.).
FLORENCE, S.C. - A South Carolina federal judge on Jan. 25 ruled that a hazing exclusion precludes commercial general liability insurance coverage for an underlying $1.6 million judgment against the vice president of the local alumni chapter of a fraternity (State Farm Fire and Casualty Co., et al. v. Admiral Insurance Co., No. 15-2745, D. S.C.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1007).
GRAND RAPIDS, Mich. - A Michigan federal judge on Jan. 25 determined that a claimant's long-term disability benefits must be reinstated because the claimant's medical records support the claim and surveillance video obtained by the insurer does not support the insurer's termination of benefits (Michelle R. Rouleau v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston, No. 15-546, W.D. Mich.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9984).
SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on July 25 granted in part an investment adviser's motion to compel discovery against a professional liability insurer in a coverage dispute arising from claims that the investment adviser misleadingly convinced a former client to invest in "sham" companies (Daeil Ro v. Everest Indemnity Insurance Co., et al, No. 16-0664, W.D. Wash.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11106).
CAMDEN, N.J. - A New Jersey federal judge on Jan. 25 granted a federal flood insurer's motion for summary judgment in its insureds' lawsuit seeking coverage for additional Superstorm Sandy damages, finding that the insureds' failure to submit a supplemental proof of loss defeats their claim (Thomas Rossetti and Yana Rossetti v. Selective Insurance Company of America, No. 15-5737, D. N.J.; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10670).