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 28

Insurers seek reimbursement for costs of defending restaurant in food toxin suit
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 20 2012

The insurance carriers for Rubio’s Restaurant have filed a motion for summary judgment in a dispute with the company that insured the restaurant’s fish supplier, following the settlement of claims pursued by a restaurant patron who alleged that he has permanent and severe neurological injuries from exposure to a toxin from the mahi-mahi in a Rubio’s fish burrito


Eighth Circuit says likelihood of MSG to cause harm is factual matter
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 21 2014

In a dispute over commercial liability insurance coverage, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that a trial court erred in deciding, as a


Seventh Circuit says no duty to defend four Loko maker
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • December 20 2013

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that Phusion Projects' commercial liability insurance carriers have no duty to defend the company


Court resolves insurance coverage issues for diacetyl defendants
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 22 2011

A New York state court has determined that a company which made the butter flavoring chemical at issue in workplace exposure lawsuits succeeded to a predecessor's insurance coverage rights


Insurance policy ambiguous; broad coverage could be available for tainted peanut butter claims
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 6 2011

A divided Delaware Supreme Court has determined that ConAgra's insurance contract is ambiguous and therefore might provide broader coverage, with a lower "retained limit" or deductible, for claims arising out of an alleged Salmonella outbreak involving the company's peanut butter


Some claims dismissed in dispute over supply-chain insurance coverage
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 12 2010

A federal court in California has dismissed without prejudice some of the claims filed by a food supplier in a dispute over insurance coverage in food-contamination litigation


Insurance company disputes obligation to provide diacetyl damages or defense
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 25 2013

A company that issued Citrus and Allied Essences Ltd. a commercial umbrella insurance policy in 2006 and 2007 has filed suit in a New York state


Federal court certifies insurance coverage question in meat recall to state court
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 11 2011

Finding no clear state precedent, a federal court in Ohio has certified to the state supreme court a question arising in a case involving insurance coverage for Listeria-contaminated meats that led to the destruction of 1 million pounds of meat products in 2006


California law applied to Costco’s cheese recall insurance coverage dispute
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • September 21 2012

Finding that California law applies to a dispute between Costco Wholesale Corp. and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., a federal court has dismissed Costco’s claims for violations of Washington state law and for bad faith coverage by estoppel arising out of the insurer’s refusal to handle claims of personal injury from cheese that Costco sold


Insurers must defend Four Loko maker in one of five lawsuits
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • January 20 2012

A federal court in Illinois has determined that insurers providing coverage to Phusion Projects, Inc., which makes Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage with large amounts of caffeine and other stimulants, do not have a duty to defend the company in lawsuits alleging injury from intoxication