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 103

Top reasons the JPML has denied centralization of products liability and salesmarketing cases

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 9 2014

Since May 2011, here are the most-cited reasons the JPML has denied Section 1407 centralization of products liability and salesmarketing cases: The

Expect focus - volume III, Summer 2014

  • Carlton Fields Jorden Burt
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 16 2014

EXPECTFOCUS is a quarterly review of developments in the insurance and financial services industry, provided on a complimentary basis to clients and

Clarification of the economic loss rule may greatly expand tort claims in construction litigation

  • Smith Currie & Hancock
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 31 2013

The economic loss rule is a judicially-created doctrine that sets forth the circumstances under which a tort action is prohibited if the only damages

Will the Ohio Supreme Court visit aisle 23 at Wal-Mart?

  • Bricker & Eckler LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 22 2012

Since June 2011, federal courts have been unpacking the lessons set forth in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, __ U.S. __, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011

U.S. court truncates effect of “policy territory” provisions, unexpectedly expanding general liability coverage for imported goods

  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 22 2008

A little-noticed but consequential decision challenges the accepted notion of coverage territory in standard general liability policies in widespread use throughout the world

Court finds coverage for consequential damages arising from product recall

  • Gray Plant Mooty
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 16 2013

A Minnesota Federal District Court Judge recently ruled that the insured is entitled to defense and indemnification under its commercial liability

Foster Farms sues insurers over definition of “recall”

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2014

Poultry manufacturer Foster Farms has filed an amended complaint in its lawsuit against its Lloyd's of London insurers, which had rejected its $14.2

National Union Fire ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, P.A. v. Tokio Marine and Nichido Fire Ins. Co.

  • Carroll, Burdick & McDonough LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 2 2015

In National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, P.A. V. Tokio Marine and Nichido Fire Ins. Co., __ Cal. Rptr. 3d __, 2015 WL 459231 (Feb. 4, 2015

Under occurrence policy, damage occurred and insurer’s duty to defend was triggered on date when the injury happened, not date of discovery

  • Locke Lord LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 17 2008

On certified questions from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Supreme Court of Texas recently held that, when a policy does not otherwise specify, damages under an occurrence-based general liability policy “occur”, and an insurer’s duty to defend is triggered, on the date when the injury happens and not on the date the injury is discovered

Fifth Circuit rules that vendor’s endorsement in manufacturer’s policy provides coverage to seller of product

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2008

Vacating the district court’s ruling in a products liability action and remanding for further proceedings, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that, under Louisiana law, a claimsmade productscompleted operations liability insurance policy issued by an insurer to a manufacturer of a product provided coverage to a seller of that product pursuant to the policy’s vendor’s endorsement