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.
Lexology logo
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 19

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

Insurance cos. seek declaration of no duty to defend Four Loko lawsuits

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 12 2012

Two commercial liability insurance companies have filed a complaint against Phusion Projects Inc., the company that makes Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage containing stimulants such as caffeine, guarana and taurine, seeking a declaration that “they do not owe a duty to defend or indemnify” the company in personal injury and wrongful death actions filed against it in several states

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

Insurer seeks declaration in coverage dispute over diacetyl litigation

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 7 2011

Arch Specialty Insurance Co. has filed a declaratory judgment action in a New York state court against a company identified as a distributor of food product ingredients, including the butter-flavoring chemical diacetyl

Court dismisses insurer’s suit against Four Loko company

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 18 2011

A federal court in Illinois has granted the motion to dismiss filed by Phusion Projects, Inc., which sells Four Loko, a caffeinated alcoholic beverage, in a case brought by one of the company’s insurers seeking a declaration that it owed no duty to defend or indemnify the beverage maker in third-party lawsuits claiming injury, death or economic harm

Insurers must defend Four Loko maker in one of five lawsuits

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 20 2012

A federal court in Illinois has determined that insurers providing coverage to Phusion Projects, Inc., which makes Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage with large amounts of caffeine and other stimulants, do not have a duty to defend the company in lawsuits alleging injury from intoxication

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

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

Insurance coverage claims settled in pistachio recall cases

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 14 2011

Setton International Foods, which recalled more than 15 million pounds of pistachios in 2009 when Salmonella was detected in a delivery to one of its customers, has reportedly entered a settlement agreement with its insurers in a dispute over coverage for third-party claims

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