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 35

Court grants, denies summary judgment in Travel Re-Insurance action

  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 23 2012

Liberty Travel (and affiliated travel and leisure companies) and Travel Re-Insurance filed cross-motions for summary judgment on a dispute related in part to reinsurance of travel insurance products sold by Liberty to its customers

Insurers dispute coverage for food-related injury

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 15 2011

Seeking a declaration about respective indemnity obligations, National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. has filed a complaint in a California federal court against several other insurance companies in a dispute stemming from a neurological injury allegedly caused by the mahi-mahi fish served in a fish burrito at a Rubio’s Restaurant

Fee exclusion deemed ambiguous

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 20 2013

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, reversed an order granting judgment on the pleadings to an insurer

Florida court holds insurer has duty to indemnify legionella bacteria claim

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 13 2011

In Westport Ins. Corp. v. VN Hotel Group, LLC, 761 F. Supp. 2d 1337 (M.D. Fla. 2010), the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that a general liability carrier had a duty to defend its insured in connection with a wrongful death lawsuit arising out of a hotel guest’s exposure to Legionella bacteria

Massachusetts court rules for carrier in property dispute, orders return of advance

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 28 2011

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently concluded that an insured could not claim property insurance benefits following a fire at its restaurant, because the insured had actual knowledge that its fire-suppression system was no longer functional, and because the insured had exclusive control over the system’s maintenance

Georgia Federal District Court finds that hot tub water is “intended for bodily consumption”

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 11 2009

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia recently held that an insurer had a duty to defend under a CGL policy and umbrella policy against claims relating to a hotel guest’s alleged contraction of Legionnaire’s Disease from a dirty hot tub

Multiple occurrences in a single E.coli outbreak: double-edged sword for insureds?

  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 1 2010

Marler Clark clients and the owners of the restaurant that sold MarlerClark's clients food they claim was contaminated with E.coli O111 joined forces against the restaurant's insurer

Horse-related events & spectator liability

  • Fennemore Craig
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 18 2012

Are you going to a horse-related event: horse show, rodeo, polo match or horse race?

New Jersey prohibits travel discrimination in life insurance policies

  • Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 31 2008

On March 26, 2008, New Jersey Governor, Jon Corzine, signed into law Assembly Bill 1586, sponsored by Assemblyman Neil Cohen

Louisiana court holds allegation of negligence did not trigger duty to defend

  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 3 2011

In its recent decision New Orleans Deli & Dining v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111928 (E.D. La. Sept. 30, 2011), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana had occasion to consider whether under Louisiana law, an underlying suit pertaining to the insured’s alleged practice of depriving its employees of tips triggered a duty to defend under a commercial general liability policy