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 27

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


First wave of settlement checks distributed in Salmonella-tainted egg outbreak
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • November 18 2011

Attorneys involved in the settlement of injury claims linked to Salmonella-contaminated eggs traced to Wright County Egg in Iowa have reportedly told The Associated Press that the first checks, issued by the egg producer’s insurer, are on their way to the first of dozens of individuals sickened during the 2010 outbreak


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


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


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


Court finds insurer has duty to defend in GM rice lawsuits
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 17 2011

A federal court in Arkansas has determined that Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. has a duty to defend an agricultural cooperative in more than 170 civil lawsuits filed by rice farmers over the contamination of their conventional crops with a genetically engineered (GE) variety


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


Deli meat maker seeks coverage from supplier’s insurance carrier
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • October 12 2012

A company whose deli meat products were allegedly contaminated by the inclusion of the Salmonella-tainted red and black pepper sold to it by a supplier has sued the supplier’s insurance company to recover damages resulting from the products’ recall


Insurance cos. seek declaration of no duty to defend Four Loko lawsuits
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • October 12 2012

Two commercial liability insurance companies have filed a complaint against Phusion Projects Inc., the company that makes Four Loko, an alcoholic beverage containing stimulants such as caffeine, guarana and taurine, seeking a declaration that “they do not owe a duty to defend or indemnify” the company in personal injury and wrongful death actions filed against it in several states


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