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 182

Ninth Circuit holds that infringement of patented website feature constitutes "advertising injury"
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • April 14 2010

The Ninth Circuit recently ruled that a general liability insurer must defend its insured against a patent infringement lawsuit relating to a feature on the insured's website


Sixth Circuit upholds an insured’s decision to amend its current policy so as to render a prior policy the sole primary insurance
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • April 13 2010

On March 11, 2010, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court decision permitting an insured to shift the burden of primary coverage for various securities-related claims to its previous insurer by purchasing an extended reporting period (ERP) and adding an endorsement to its current primary policy making it specifically excess of the prior policy


Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reverses summary judgment and holds against insurer in bad faith action related to uninsured motorist claim
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • August 27 2009

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently reversed an award of summary judgment that had been in favor of an insurer in a bad faith action regarding an uninsured motorist claim, and found against the insurer


Katrina: Mississippi Supreme Court finds that an anti-concurrent causation clause in a homeowners’ insurance policy does not exclude coverage for loss separately caused by wind and water
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • November 2 2009

On October 8, 2009, the Mississippi Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Corban v. USAA Insurance Company, holding that the anti-concurrent causation ("ACC") clause in a homeowners’ insurance policy is inapplicable where both wind and water did not act in conjunction in causing Katrina-related damages


Illinois federal court rules that reinsurer’s motion to vacate arbitration award is untimely under the Federal Arbitration Act
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • November 4 2010

R&Q Reinsurance Co. v. American Motorist Ins. Co., involved a dispute arising under a series of reinsurance treaties entered into by the parties


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


Connecticut Attorney General wins in landmark contingent commissions case
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • May 10 2010

In a first-of-its-kind victory for a state attorney general, the office of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal won its case against an insurance brokerage whom the court found to have failed to disclose to consumers the contingent commissions it received from certain insurers


Second Circuit finds that service of suit provision in treaties unambiguously waived reinsurer's right of removal
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • January 3 2011

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision that remanded to state court a lawsuit asserted by the Liquidator of Midland Insurance Company against its reinsurer, Dunav Re, finding that the Service of Suit clause in the reinsurance treaties at issue unambiguously waived Dunav Re's right to remove the dispute to federal court


California federal court rules that “insured v. insured” exclusion does not preclude insurer’s payments of defense costs in claim brought jointly by insureds and non-insureds
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • December 1 2009

The United States District Court for the Northern District of California, applying California law, has held that an “insured v. insured” clause exclusion in a D&O policy for claims asserted by an insured against an insured did not preclude the insurer from paying for the entire defense costs incurred by insured and non-insured claimants


Connecticut Superior Court held that home seller’s misrepresentation regarding lead paint constituted “occurrence” and insurer had a duty to defend
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • December 1 2009

A Connecticut Superior Court recently awarded summary judgment against an insurer on the basis that a home seller’s misrepresentation regarding the existence of lead paint in the home constituted an "occurrence" under her insurance policy and, therefore, the insurer had a duty to defend the seller in a lawsuit alleging negligent misrepresentation and was liable for paying the stipulated judgment agreed to by the parties