We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 11-20 of 201

Missouri court addresses owned property exclusion

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 25 2012

In its recent decision in Clarinet v. Essex Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7300 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 23, 2012), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri had occasion to consider whether a general liability policy afforded coverage for an insured’s obligation to stabilize and later demolish its own building so as to prevent damage to third-party property

Texas court holds prior knowledge exclusion in E&O policy inapplicable

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 20 2012

In its recent decision in OneBeacon Insurance Company v. T. Wade Welch & Associates, et al., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 178587 (S.D. Tex. Dec. 18, 2012), the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas had occasion to consider the application of a prior knowledge exclusion in a professional liability policy

Illinois court addresses coverage for trade dress infringement

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 23 2011

In its recent decision Priceless Clothing Co. v. Travelers Casualty Ins. Co. of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53833 (N.D.Ill. May 19, 2011), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois had occasion to consider the scope of advertising injury coverage afforded under a general liability policy

New Jersey Supreme Court addresses inter-insurer contribution rights

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 17 2013

In a case of first impression, the Supreme Court of New Jersey, in its recent decision in Potomac Ins. Co. of Illinois v. Pennsylvania Manufacturer's

Supreme Court of Washington holds carrier cannot sue defense counsel

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 4 2013

In its recent decision in Stewart Title Guar. Co. v. Sterling Sav. Bank, 2013 Wash. LEXIS 769 (Wash. Oct. 3, 2013), the Supreme Court of Washington

New York court holds claimants had no standing to sue professional liability insurer

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 25 2014

In its recent decision in Commonwealth Land Title Ins Co. v. American Signature Services, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22172 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 20, 2014

Pennsylvania court considers designated premises or project limitation

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 25 2012

In its recent decision in Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Darrah, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71768 (M.D. Pa. May 23, 2012), the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania had occasion to reconsider the effect of a designated premises or project limitation endorsement

Illinois federal court allows consideration of extrinsic evidence

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 13 2012

In its recent decision in Nautilus Ins. Co. v. Ricciardi Dev., LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 161244 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 9, 2012), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois had occasion to consider when and under what circumstances an insurer can rely on facts extrinsic to a complaint in evaluating whether it has a duty to defend

Illinois court holds abstention doctrine does not require dismissal of insurance-related declaratory judgment action

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 6 2011

Under Illinois law, an insurer has two options when it is unsure as to whether an underlying claim triggers a defense obligation under a liability policy: it can provide a defense under a reservation of rights or it can seek a declaratory judgment as to its coverage obligations prior to trial

Maryland court holds prejudice rule applies to claims made and reported policy

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 28 2014

In its recent decision in Navigators Specialty Ins. Co. v. Med. Benefits Administrators of Maryland, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22631 (D. Md. Feb. 21