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 42

Some claims dismissed in dispute over supply-chain insurance coverage

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 12 2010

A federal court in California has dismissed without prejudice some of the claims filed by a food supplier in a dispute over insurance coverage in food-contamination litigation

Eighth Circuit finds some poultry processing facility losses not covered by insurance

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 12 2010

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that certain business expense claims and a personal property claim made by a poultry processor for damages sustained during a break in electrical service caused by an ice storm were not covered by the processor's insurance policy

Insurance companies seek contribution from other insurers in defending diacetyl exposure lawsuits

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 16 2010

A group of insurance companies has sued another group of insurers, seeking a declaration that the defendants are also required to indemnify and defend flavoring companies that have been named as defendants in lawsuits by former microwave popcorn- and candy-plant employees alleging injuries from exposure to diacetyl

Insurance company disputes obligation to provide diacetyl damages or defense

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 25 2013

A company that issued Citrus and Allied Essences Ltd. a commercial umbrella insurance policy in 2006 and 2007 has filed suit in a New York state

Court considers insurance coverage for Listeria contamination

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 10 2010

A federal court in Ohio has determined that, for the most part, an "all-risk" insurance policy excludes from coverage the losses sustained by a meat processor whose products were contaminated with Listeria during processing

Federal court dismisses insurance coverage action in tainted baby formula case

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 25 2011

A federal court in Virginia has issued an order dismissing without prejudice claims filed against two insurers by a company that makes baby formula; the parties stipulated to the dismissal after similar litigation concluded with a defense verdict following trial in state court

Federal court certifies insurance coverage question in meat recall to state court

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 11 2011

Finding no clear state precedent, a federal court in Ohio has certified to the state supreme court a question arising in a case involving insurance coverage for Listeria-contaminated meats that led to the destruction of 1 million pounds of meat products in 2006

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

Court resolves insurance coverage issues for diacetyl defendants

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 22 2011

A New York state court has determined that a company which made the butter flavoring chemical at issue in workplace exposure lawsuits succeeded to a predecessor's insurance coverage rights

Insurance policy ambiguous; broad coverage could be available for tainted peanut butter claims

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 6 2011

A divided Delaware Supreme Court has determined that ConAgra's insurance contract is ambiguous and therefore might provide broader coverage, with a lower "retained limit" or deductible, for claims arising out of an alleged Salmonella outbreak involving the company's peanut butter