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

Michigan court holds notice of potential claim insufficient

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 24 2013

In its recent decision in Lemons v. Mikocem, LLC, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133976 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 19, 2013), the United States District Court for the

Florida court holds classified operations endorsement precludes coverage

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 8 2013

In its recent decision in Canal Indem. Co. v. Margaretville of NSB, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93658 (M.D. Fla. July 3, 2013), the United States

Fifth Circuit agrees: duty to indemnify broader than duty to defend under texas law

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 26 2011

In D.R. Horton-Texas, Ltd. v. Markel Int’l Ins. Co., 300 S.W. 3d 740 (Tex. 2009) and Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co., 334 S.W.3d 217 (Tex. 2010), the Texas Supreme Court established the rule that an insurer can have a duty to indemnify even in the absence of a corresponding duty to defend

Texas appellate court enforces appraisal provision

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 26 2013

In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals of Texas for the Fourteenth District revisited the scope of the appraisal process in light of the prior

California court holds no coverage for Prop 65 case

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 15 2011

California’s Proposition 65 of the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1965, 25249.5 et seq., is a “remedial statute” which, among other things, requires “businesses to warn individuals about carcinogens and reproductive toxins to which they may be exposed through commercial transactions, employment, and the environment.” Consumer Cause, Inc. v. SmileCare, 91 Cal.App.4th 454 (Cal.App. 2001

California federal court holds unintentional conversion not an occurrence

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 27 2012

In its recent decision in Alco Iron & Metal Co. v. American International Specialty Lines Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166692 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 21, 2012), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California had occasion to consider whether an insured’s intentional acts that result in unintentional harms can be considered an “occurrence” for the purpose of a general liability policy

New Jersey federal court addresses related wrongful acts

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 18 2011

In its recent decision Gladstone v. Westport Insurance Corporation, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 132100 (D.N.J. Nov. 16, 2011), the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey addressed the concept of related wrongful acts in the context of a lawyers malpractice insurance policy

Arizona court finds coverage under D&O policy

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 11 2011

The eight-year lawsuit captioned Wojtunik v. Kealy, pending in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, has resulted in yet another decision of interest concerning directors and officers coverage

Florida court holds criminal conduct exclusion in E&O policy applicable

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 12 2013

In its recent decision in Certain Interested Underwriters at Lloyd's v. AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159639 (S.D. Fla

California court holds professional services exclusion ambiguous

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

In its recent decision in Corky McMillin Construction Services, Inc. v. U.S. Specialty Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3438 (S.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2012), the United States District Court for the Southern District of California considered the application of an errors and omissions exclusion contained in a directors and officers insurance policy