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 368

NJ Supreme Court decision expands privileging liability for healthcare facilities
  • Day Pitney LLP
  • USA
  • October 23 2015

On September 29, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued its ruling in Jarrell v. Kaul, deciding several issues in connection with whether a physician's


Oklahoma Court holds failure to warn not a covered professional service
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • March 7 2013

In its recent decision in Hanover Am. Ins. Co. v. Saul, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29739 (W.D. Okl. Mar. 5, 2013), the United States District Court for


Related acts provisions in professional liability policies
  • Mendes & Mount LLP
  • USA
  • February 7 2017

Insurance policy provisions concerning 'related' acts are frequently found in professional liability and various claims-made policies


Florida court affirms that insurer of physician is not obligated to indemnify based upon applicability of business liability policy’s professional services exclusion
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • January 27 2010

The District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida (the "Appeals Court") recently affirmed the trial court's determination that a doctor's business owner insurer was not obligated to indemnify the doctor for a wrongful death suit that resulted, in part, from the mis-filing of laboratory results by the doctor's assistant, although it did have a duty to defend


District court narrowly interprets bodily injury exclusion
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • June 23 2011

The United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia has narrowly construed a bodily injury exclusion in a professional liability insurance policy in connection with determining that coverage existed for negligent supervision claims against the insured related to allegations of patient molestation by the insured’s employee


Oklahoma court holds no coverage for medical malpractice claim
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • February 1 2013

In its recent decision in Admiral Ins. Co. v. Thomas, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10754 (W.D. Ok. Jan. 28, 2013), the United States District for the


Liability insurers may have duty to defend against federal prosecutions, California Court of Appeal holds
  • Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP
  • USA
  • May 6 2013

The Second Appellate District of California held on May 1 in Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. v. Lopez that California Insurance Code section 533.5(b) does not


Dental malpractice coverage required under senate-approved legislation
  • Duane Morris LLP
  • USA
  • June 24 2011

Legislation that requires dentists to carry malpractice insurance cleared the Senate


Professional services exclusion bars coverage for insured entity's vicarious liability
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • April 4 2011

A New Jersey appellate court has held that a professional services exclusion in a medical center's professional liability insurance policy precluded coverage for the center's vicarious liability for the negligence of its doctor


Insurer has broad discretion to settleeven over its insured’s objection
  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • USA
  • August 18 2011

Dr. Mohan Papudesu was a defendant in a wrongful-death lawsuit