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 1,856

Novastar plaintiffs appeal subprime dismissal

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 30 2008

In early 2007, a purported class of investors in NovaStar Financial Corporation, a residential mortgage lender that made a percentage of its loans to subprime borrowers, sued NovaStar and certain of its directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri

Mortgage broker's E&O policy excludes coverage for fraudulent acts of its employee in connection with subprime mortgage loan application and documents

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 3 2008

The First Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the fraud and dishonesty exclusion in an errors and omissions policy issued to a mortgage originator and broker excluded coverage for the fraudulent acts of one of its employees in the loan origination process

Pennsylvania federal court bars as untimely insurers’ attempt to join additional insurers in asbestos coverage case

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 6 2008

A Pennsylvania federal court recently ruled that a group of defendant insurers in an asbestos coverage case would not be permitted to join a number of additional insurers as defendants in the action as their request for joinder was untimely

S.D.N.Y. dismissal in Amex indicates how courts should analyze suits spawned by credit crisis

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 1 2008

The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently dismissed for a second time a federal securities class action against American Express Co. (“Amex”

President enacted new Federal Rule of Evidence 502: but risks still remain for inadvertent disclosures

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 26 2008

On September 19, 2008, President George W. Bush signed into law Federal Rule of Evidence 502 (“FRE 502”), which seeks to reduce the rapidly increasing costs of privilege reviews in discovery primarily created by the growth of e-commerce, e-contracting and the resulting increase in the volume of e-discoverable material

Seventh Circuit joins First and Fifth Circuits in rejecting TILA rescission class actions

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 25 2008

On September 24, 2008, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal for the Seventh Circuit issued its much-anticipated decision in Andrews v. Chevy Chase Bank, No. 07-1326 (7th Cir. Sept. 24, 2008), holding that class actions may not be certified for claims seeking rescission under the Truth in Lending Act

Securities claim relates back to notice of circumstances regarding patent infringement suit

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 30 2008

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California recently held that a securities fraud claim related back to a notice of circumstances given by the insured to its primary and excess D&O insurers concerning an earlier patent infringement case

Strand vs. Escambia County victory

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 30 2008

Edwards Angell Palmer & Dodge won an unusual victory on a motion for rehearing and clarification in the Florida Supreme Court

Delaware court weighs in on fill the gap issue; declines to follow Qualcomm and Comerica

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 29 2008

Recently, the Delaware Superior Court, in a case entitled HLTH Corp. v. AESIC, C.A. No. 07C-09-102 RRC, declined to follow the holdings of Qualcomm, Inc. v. Certain Underwriters At Lloyd’s, 161 Cal.App.4th 184 (4th Dist. 2008) and Comerica Inc. v. Zurich American Ins. Co., 498 F.Supp.2d 1019 (E.D. Mich. 2007) on the following issue: where an insured settles with a primary insurer andor certain underlying excess insurers for less than the full limits of liability of those policies, what are an excess insurer’s obligations to its insured?

Court finds that insurer did not waive defense in its denial letter due to “catch-all” statement

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 9 2008

A Pennsylvania state court recently held that an insurer had not waived a defense by failing to specifically reference it in a coverage denial letter because the letter contained a “catch-all” provision reserving the insurer’s rights to raise other coverage defenses and issues