Does Medical Science Support "Continuous" Asbestos Trigger?
In the recent Plant Insulation case, a California court addressed the evolution of the medical science behind the “continuous” asbestos trigger....By: Gilbert LLP
View ArticlePatton Boggs Reinsurance Newsletter- March 2013: New York Court of Appeals...
In a closely watched asbestos settlement allocation case, the New York Court of Appeals has modified the order of the intermediate appellate court to deny summary judgment to the cedent based on two...
View ArticleCourt Affirms that Medical Science Supports “Continuous” Asbestos Trigger
In the recent Plant Insulation case, a California court addressed the evolution of the medical science behind the “continuous” asbestos trigger....By: Gilbert LLP
View ArticleCalifornia Court Addresses Horizontal Exhaustion Requirement
In the recent decision Kaiser Cement & Gypsum Corp. v. Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania 2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 269 (2nd Dist. April 8, 2013), the California Court of Appeal considered...
View ArticleInsurance Recovery Law -- Jul 26, 2013
Three Wins and A New Rule - In this edition of the Manatt newsletter, we take a look at several new cases that examine an array of important insurance issues. First, though, we report an important...
View ArticleInsurance Recovery Law -- Aug 07, 2013
Home Base - General Principles of Insurance Policy Interpretation -- Trends in the case law tend to catch our attention, but often practitioners and clients become sidetracked and miss the connection...
View ArticleWisconsin Supreme Court Declares No Vacancy for Insured in Asbestos Coverage...
In Phillips, et al. v. Parmelee, et al., – N.W.2d –, 2013 WL 6818145 (Wis. Dec. 27, 2013), the Supreme Court of Wisconsin affirmed trial and appellate court decisions in favor of an insurer arguing...
View ArticleHercules and the Lernaean Hydra: The Hercules Removal Jurisprudence Sprouts...
In yet another twist in the tortured labors of the Hercules jurisprudence regarding removal of general maritime law claims under 28 U.S.C. §1441(a), the Eastern District of Louisiana has generated a...
View ArticleCourt Construes Disputed Insurance Policy Language And Requires Reinsurer To...
The case involved two facultative reinsurance contracts, each of which covered excess liability for similar umbrella liability insurance policies, and each of which contained a “follow the settlements”...
View ArticlePolicyholder Observer
Encryption Flaw "Heartbleed" Creates Data Risk: How Insurance Can Stanch the Bleeding - In early April, news broke of an encryption flaw named “Heartbleed” that exposed companies to data breaches for...
View ArticleNew Jersey Appellate Court Keeps “Running Spigot” Open on Allocation of...
New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently affirmed each of several challenged rulings rendered in a long-running coverage dispute between plaintiff IMO Industries and its many historical insurers...
View ArticleCedent Loses Motion For Reinsurance Payments Due To Late Notice And...
In a reinsurance coverage dispute involving coverage for an underlying settlement of asbestos liability, a New York court considered whether the defenses of failure to provide prompt notice and failure...
View ArticleDRM client wins important case precluding termination of insurer insolvency...
The Vermont Supreme Court has ruled in In Re Ambassador Ins. Co., 2015 VT 4 (Vt. Jan. 23, 2015) that the liquidator of Ambassador Insurance acted unreasonably in setting a December 31, 2013 bar date...
View ArticleInsurance Recovery Law - April 2015
Legal Issues Not Proper Expert Testimony - Why it matters: As a good reminder concerning the boundaries for admissibility of expert opinions, a federal court in Texas recently granted a policyholder’s...
View ArticleReinsurers’ Motion To Vacate Arbitration Award Held Time-Barred
A federal judge in New York has denied reinsurers’ motions for relief from a prior judgment. The reinsurers, Equitas Insurance Limited and Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London, argued that they...
View ArticleMergers Just Became Safer for California’s Corporate Policyholders
This morning the California Supreme Court announced the thoroughly sensible ruling that a corporation may transfer its rights under liability insurance policies without obtaining the consent of the...
View ArticleVictory for California Policyholders
Last week, the California Supreme Court ruled in Fluor Corp. v. Superior Court, No. S205889, 2015 WL4938295 (Cal. 2015), that an insurer is precluded from refusing to honor an insured’s assignment of...
View ArticleCalifornia Supreme Court Reverses Prior Ruling On Anti-Assignment Clauses
In Fluor Corporation v. The Superior Court of Orange County (Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co., real party in interest), 2015 Cal. LEXIS 5631 (Aug. 20, 2015), the California Supreme Court...
View ArticleCalifornia Declares New Rules for Assignment of Long Tail Claims
Last week, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of California changed the law governing anti-assignment provisions in liability insurance policies. Twelve years ago, in Henkel Corp. v. Hartford...
View ArticleBetter Late Than Never: The California Supreme Court Reverses Itself, Holding...
Asset purchase and sale transactions are a preferred structure for many corporate deals. For a variety of reasons, it may be prudent for businesses or product lines to be transferred through these...
View Article
