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 324

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 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 liability policy proceeds not property of bankruptcy estates
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • June 23 2011

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nevada has held that proceeds from a professional liability policy were not property of the insured-debtors' bankruptcy estate because the proceeds were payable only for the benefit of third party claimants and could not be accessed by the debtors directly


Payments by captive insurer count as loss for purposes of excess coverage
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • January 13 2011

A trial court in Massachusetts has held that payments by an insured's captive insurer, which provided the primary layer of insurance, count as loss for purposes of triggering an excess insurer's coverage obligation


Comprehensive medical malpractice reforms advance in House and Senate committees
  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • USA
  • April 18 2011

Last week, several proposals providing additional medical malpractice protection for physicians, hospitals, and medical schools, as well as proposals requiring out-of-state physicians to obtain expert witness certificates in order to testify in medical malpractice actions, advanced in the House and Senate


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


Motions for summary judgment granted in part, denied in part, in action brought by hospital against insurer to recover for breach of contract for premiums drawn down from letter of credit: Lenox Hill Hosp. v. Amer. Int'l Group, Inc.
  • Farrell Fritz PC
  • USA
  • July 26 2011

In a June 7, 2011 decision by Justice Fried, the Court granted in part and denied in part cross-motions for summary judgment


Medical malpractice premiums to increase in New York
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • August 6 2007

On July 2, 2007, New York State Insurance Superintendent Eric R. Dinallo announced that the Department approved a 14 increase in medical malpractice insurance rates