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 740

California limits workers' compensation claims by professional athletes, including former NFL players with concussion-related injuries
  • Hogan Lovells
  • USA
  • October 11 2013

Following news of the NFL concussion litigation settlement, the NFL and other professional leaguesteams as well their insurers just


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


Louisiana court holds allegation of negligence did not trigger duty to defend
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • October 3 2011

In its recent decision New Orleans Deli & Dining v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111928 (E.D. La. Sept. 30, 2011), the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana had occasion to consider whether under Louisiana law, an underlying suit pertaining to the insured’s alleged practice of depriving its employees of tips triggered a duty to defend under a commercial general liability policy


Multiple occurrences in a single E.coli outbreak: double-edged sword for insureds?
  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • USA
  • November 1 2010

Marler Clark clients and the owners of the restaurant that sold MarlerClark's clients food they claim was contaminated with E.coli O111 joined forces against the restaurant's insurer


Battery exclusion prevents coverage for exotic dancer set on fire by customer
  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • USA
  • October 2 2013

Why it matters: An exotic dancer was the victim of a terrible crime perpetrated by a spurned applicant for a job as an exotic dancer. The victim sued


Wash. Ct. Of Appeals: firearms exclusion precludes coverage for pre-shooting negligence
  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • USA
  • January 25 2013

In Capitol Specialty Insurance v. JBC Entertainment Holdings, Inc., et al. (pdf), the Washington Court of Appeals held that a firearms exclusion in a


U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals holds that liquor liability exclusion applies to claim against racetrack owner
  • Phelps Dunbar LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2014

The U.S. Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has held that an insurer had no obligation under Kentucky law to defend or indemnify a racetrack owner


Eleventh Circuit affirms duty to defend Legionnaires’ Disease lawsuit
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • October 26 2012

In its recent decision in Westport Ins. Corp. v. VN Hotel Group, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 22187 (11th Cir. Oct. 25, 2012), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, applying Florida law, had occasion to consider whether a pollution exclusion and a fungibacteria exclusion operated to bar coverage for an underlying wrongful death claim involving Legionnaires' Disease


Taco Bell appeals insurance coverage case to Ninth Circuit
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 13 2011

Taco Bell has requested that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals review a district court determination that three insurance companies are not required to provide coverage under commercial liability policies for economic loss allegedly arising from decreased patronage in the wake of a 2006 E. coli outbreak


Massachusetts court rules for carrier in property dispute, orders return of advance
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 28 2011

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently concluded that an insured could not claim property insurance benefits following a fire at its restaurant, because the insured had actual knowledge that its fire-suppression system was no longer functional, and because the insured had exclusive control over the system’s maintenance