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: 11-20 of 201

Sixth Circuit holds supplier is a subcontractor under business risk exclusion
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • July 17 2011

In its recent decision Mosser Constr. v. Travelers Indem. Co., 2011 FED App. 0481N (6th Cir. July 14, 2011), the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, applying Ohio law, had occasion to consider what constitutes a “subcontractor” for the purpose of a “your work” exclusion in a general liability policy


South Carolina court awards insured declaratory judgment fees through appeal
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • May 8 2012

In a matter involving an issue of first impression under South Carolina law, the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, in its recent decision in Jessco, Inc. v. Builders Mutual Insurance Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 62114 (May 3, 2012), considered whether an insured is entitled to recover fees and costs after successfully litigating a declaratory judgment action on appeal


Fifth Circuit addresses contractual liability exclusion
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • February 22 2012

In its recent decision in Colony Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Manitex, L.L.C., 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 3311 (5th Cir. Feb. 20, 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, applying Texas law, considered what constituted an “insured contract” for the purpose of a contractual liability exclusion in a general liability policy


California court addresses payment of self-insured retention
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • January 9 2012

In its recent decision in National Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Federal Ins. Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 641 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2012), the United States District Court for the Northern District of California had occasion to consider the issue of whether an insured was required to satisfy a self-insured retention with its own funds, or whether the retention could be paid by other insurance


Pennsylvania federal court addresses insolvency exclusion
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • December 1 2011

In its recent decision ACE Capital Ltd. v. Morgan Waldon Ins. Mgmt., LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135902 (W.D. Pa. Nov. 28, 2011), the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania had occasion to consider the scope of an insolvency exclusion in a professional liability policy


California court reaffirms negligent professional advice not an occurrence
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • December 11 2012

In its recent decision in Aquarius Well Drilling, Inc. v. American States Insurance Co., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172770 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 4, 2012), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California had occasion to consider whether an insured’s professional negligence constituted an occurrence for the purpose of triggering coverage under a general liability policy


Massachusetts court holds fee dispute not covered under E&O policy
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • April 7 2011

The recent decision by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Clermont v. Continental Casualty Co., 2011 U.S Dist. LEXIS 32850 (D.Mass. Mar. 29, 2011) provides an interesting and illustrative study of the limits of coverage under a lawyer’s malpractice policy, in particular, what types of disputes arise out of an attorney’s “professional services.”


Illinois court addresses coverage for trade dress infringement
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2011

In its recent decision Priceless Clothing Co. v. Travelers Casualty Ins. Co. of America, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 53833 (N.D.Ill. May 19, 2011), the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois had occasion to consider the scope of advertising injury coverage afforded under a general liability policy


Insured’s settlement without consent bars coverage under OCIP
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • December 18 2013

In its recent decision in PeriniTompkins Joint Venture v. Ace Am. Ins. Co., 2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 24865 (4th Cir. Dec. 16, 2013), the United States


Minnesota Supreme Court applies pollution exclusion to carbon monoxide
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • June 4 2013

In its recent decision in Midwest Family Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wolters, 2013 Minn. LEXIS 304 (Minn. May 31, 2013), the Minnesota Supreme Court had