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: 11-20 of 610

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


Connecticut Superior Court grants summary judgment for insurer based on total liquor liability exclusion
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • June 9 2009

An insurer was recently granted summary judgment against its insured based on a commercial general liability insurance policy’s total liquor liability exclusion ("TLLE"


Tenth Circuit rules that widespread E. coli outbreak constitutes a single occurrence under liability policies
  • Steptoe & Johnson LLP
  • USA
  • July 26 2012

In Republic Underwriters Insurance Company v. Moore, No. 11-5075, 2012 WL 2948177 (10th Cir., July 20, 2012), the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, applying Oklahoma law, held that a restaurant’s general liability insurers were entitled to summary judgment that several hundred E. coli claims against the policyholder arose out of a single occurrence because all of the injuries were caused by one restaurant’s ongoing preparation of contaminated food


Georgia Federal District Court finds that hot tub water is “intended for bodily consumption”
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • November 11 2009

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia recently held that an insurer had a duty to defend under a CGL policy and umbrella policy against claims relating to a hotel guest’s alleged contraction of Legionnaire’s Disease from a dirty hot tub


11th Circuit holds E&O insurer has duty to defend legionalla claim
  • Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP
  • USA
  • March 12 2014

In its recent decision in James River Ins. Co. v. Hufsey-Nicolaides-Garcia-Suarez Associates, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 4415 (11th Cir. Mar. 10, 2014


Florida Appellate Court holds that insurer must provide separate counsel to co-defendant insureds
  • Locke Lord LLP
  • USA
  • March 4 2013

On February 20, 2013, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal held that an insurer was required to provide separate counsel to two


Fee exclusion deemed ambiguous
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • May 20 2013

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, applying California law, reversed an order granting judgment on the pleadings to an insurer


Insurers dispute coverage for food-related injury
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 15 2011

Seeking a declaration about respective indemnity obligations, National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa. has filed a complaint in a California federal court against several other insurance companies in a dispute stemming from a neurological injury allegedly caused by the mahi-mahi fish served in a fish burrito at a Rubio’s Restaurant


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


Court grants, denies summary judgment in Travel Re-Insurance action
  • Jorden Burt LLP
  • USA
  • May 23 2012

Liberty Travel (and affiliated travel and leisure companies) and Travel Re-Insurance filed cross-motions for summary judgment on a dispute related in part to reinsurance of travel insurance products sold by Liberty to its customers