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 553

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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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