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 1,108

Definition of wrongful act and intentional acts exclusion bar coverage for action alleging fraud and conspiracy
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • November 14 2012

Applying Illinois law, the Appellate Court of Illinois has held, based on the policy’s definition of “wrongful act” and its intentional acts exclusion, that a professional liability insurer has no duty to defend an action alleging fraud and conspiracy


Employee’s negligent acts constituted “professional services” where employee had specialized training and performed insured company’s principal tasks
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • November 6 2007

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has held that a landscaping employee's negligence in inspecting and removing overgrown vegetation to prevent hazardous road conditions was covered under a professional liability policy covering "professional services" rather than under a general liability policy that excluded coverage for "damages due to any services of a professional nature."


Notice of intent to sue attorney for malpractice triggered duty to defend claim for sanctions
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • January 30 2009

Applying Pennsylvania law, a federal district court has held that a letter advising an insured attorney that his former client intended to bring suit for malpractice constituted a “claim” under a professional liability policy such that the insurer was obligated to defend pre-suit proceedings against the attorney for sanctions that had been brought by opposing counsel in the underlying action and in which the former client had joined the demand for relief


Notice under occurrence policies: issues beyond the prejudice debate
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • December 18 2008

This article will review key notice issues under occurrence-based policies, underscoring how multifaceted and complex the questions are that can arise when a notice defense is presented


Priority of payments provision allows insurer to make settlement payments on covered claims against directors and officers
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • October 25 2012

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Nebraska has held that an insurer may make settlement payments for claims against a debtor’s directors and officers where any claims of the debtor are subordinate to those of the directors and officers under the terms of the policy


Eighth Circuit: no coverage under D&O policy for claim arising from contract
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • May 6 2008

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, applying Missouri law, has held that a D&O policy exclusion for claims arising from a contract barred coverage for a lawsuit involving an insured's performance as a subcontractor, regardless of whether the underlying counts sounded directly in contract


Dishonesty exclusion bars coverage for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty claims
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • August 14 2013

A federal court in Colorado, applying Colorado law, has found that a dishonesty exclusion bars coverage for legal malpractice and aiding and abetting


Tennessee federal court requires showing of prejudice for late notice defense
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • October 26 2009

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Tennessee has held that, under Tennessee law, an insured’s late notice of claim made during the existing period of a claims-made policy does not bar coverage absent evidence of prejudice to the insurer


Supreme Court clarifies application of Fair Credit Reporting Act to insurance underwriting; important practical issues remain open
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • June 4 2007

Long-awaited rulings today by the U.S. Supreme Court in consolidated cases resolved crucial disputes about how the "adverse action" notifications provision of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) applies to personal lines underwriting actions


Notice of circumstances was too general to satisfy policy
  • Wiley Rein LLP
  • USA
  • June 14 2007

A federal district court in Illinois has held that a policyholder failed to provide sufficient notice of circumstances that could potentially give rise to a claim to trigger coverage under a D&O policy where the policyholder informed the insurers that it was "contemplating" filing for bankruptcy and expected claims to be filed against its directors and officers