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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 123

Lloyd’s syndicates file declaratory judgment action against BP
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 1 2010

On April 20, 2010, an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon rig in the Gulf of Mexico touched off a subsurface leak in a BP oil well at the ocean's floor


Federal court finds that limit of liability cap in facultative certificate includes a cedent’s defense expenses
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 1 2010

Pacific Employers Insurance Company ("PEIC") entered into a facultative reinsurance certificate with Global Reinsurance Corporation of America, fka Constitution Reinsurance Corporation ("Global"), which reinsured an umbrella commercial liability insurance policy issued by PEIC to Buffalo Forge Company


Federal court rules no coverage for Chinese drywall damages under homeowner’s policy
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 7 2010

On June 3, 2010 Judge Robert G. Doumar of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia found that a homeowner’s policy did not cover damages associated with Chinese manufactured drywall


Court holds coverage for Madoff suits excluded under policy’s insolvency exclusion
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 8 2010

The US District Court for the District of Connecticut recently dismissed a customer suit against an insurer, based upon its determination that all of the underlying claims were excluded by the policy's Insolvency Exclusion


Iowa Supreme Court upholds denial of coverage to life insurer for failure to disclose applicants’ HIV positive status
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 7 2010

In Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co. v. Chubb Custom Insurance Co. et al., the Iowa Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s ruling that Farm Bureau was not entitled to liability coverage in its disputes with two applicants that were HIV positive


First Circuit: no coverage for false arrest suit where arrest and conviction occurred prior to the policy period
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2009

The First Circuit recently upheld a trial court’s ruling that an insurer need not defend or indemnify the defendants in a wrongful conviction claim where the wrongful acts occurred prior to the policy period


New York federal court vacates prior order finding that arbitration must start anew
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 30 2009

In early January, www.insurereinsure.com reported on In the matter of the Petition of Ins. Co. of North America, et al. against Public Service Mut. Ins. Co., No. 08-cv-7003 (S.D.N.Y.), in which the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York held that an arbitration must start anew because a member of the arbitration panel resigned for health reasons prior to the rendering of an award


Insured bears burden of proving allocation of jury award between covered and non-covered claims unless insurer controls defense
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2009

The West Virginia Supreme Court recently answered the following question certified from the U.S. District Court in that state: Does the insured bear the burden of showing that a jury awarded damages for covered, as opposed to non-covered, claims when the answer is not clear from the award itself?


Update from RAA Re Contracts Conference presentation on extra contractual obligations and losses in excess of policy limits
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 23 2010

We have been tracking developments at the RAA Re Contracts Conference, which took place this week in New York, as previously reported on www


Connecticut District Court: insurer's default judgment does not necessarily preclude litigation in subrogation action
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • July 12 2010

A Connecticut District Court recently held that plaintiffs, who brought a subrogation action to recover a judgment entered in their favor in an underlying legal malpractice action against their attorneys, were entitled to litigate coverage issues even though the attorneys' insurer obtained a default judgment against the attorneys in a separate coverage action