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: 1-10 of 28

Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal of negligent misrepresentation claim

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

In its recent decision in MultiCare Health System v. Lexington Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 17981 (9th Cir. Aug. 28, 2013), the United States Court

Payments by captive insurer count as loss for purposes of excess coverage

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 13 2011

A trial court in Massachusetts has held that payments by an insured's captive insurer, which provided the primary layer of insurance, count as loss for purposes of triggering an excess insurer's coverage obligation

Claims-made professional liability policy enforceable under Nevada law

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 16 2007

The United States District Court for Nevada has held that claims-made professional liability policies are enforceable under Nevada law

Insurer not entitled to rescission as matter of law based on undisclosed malpractice claim made after application was submitted

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 9 2010

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, applying Illinois law, has held that it could not determine that a physician's failure to disclose a claim made while his application for malpractice insurance was pending was a material misrepresentation as a matter of law

Oklahoma Court holds failure to warn not a covered professional service

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 7 2013

In its recent decision in Hanover Am. Ins. Co. v. Saul, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29739 (W.D. Okl. Mar. 5, 2013), the United States District Court for

Eighth Circuit finds notice sufficient under claims-made policy

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 23 2011

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, applying Minnesota law, has held that an insured's letter to the insurer enclosing a notice of administrative investigation satisfied the timing and content requirements of a claims-made policy's notice provision

Missouri court of appeals finds no right of equitable contribution based on other insurance clauses

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 26 2009

The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District recently held that a nurse's professional liability insurer was not liable for contribution to her employer's professional liability insurer after the latter settled a wrongful death claim involving the nurse

Reinsurer’s request to belatedly amend “imprecise” pleading denied due to lack of diligence

  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 6 2011

Employers Reinsurance Corporation was denied a request to correct “imprecise” language in its answer and counterclaim in a suit brought against it by a medical malpractice insurer for failing to fund a settlement of a lawsuit against one of the malpractice insurer’s covered physicians

Oklahoma court holds no coverage for medical malpractice claim

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 1 2013

In its recent decision in Admiral Ins. Co. v. Thomas, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10754 (W.D. Ok. Jan. 28, 2013), the United States District for the

Insurer not entitled to rescission as matter of law based on undisclosed malpractice claim made after application was submitted

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 20 2010

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, applying Illinois law, has held that it could not determine that a physician’s failure to disclose a claim made while his application for malpractice insurance was pending was a material misrepresentation as a matter of law