The District of Connecticut, in Gerber Scientific International, Inc. v. Roland DGA Corp., et al., Case No. 3:06cv2024 (Judge Covello) (June 27
Until 2012, an insured seeking coverage after providing late notice of a claim had the burden of proving that its insurer was not prejudiced by the
On June 3, Connecticut's intermediate level appellate court held that the failure of a policyholder to file a sworn statement in proof of loss was
Liability policies typically contain provisions that make timely notice of claims a condition precedent to coverage, but the impact of those provisions varies widely across jurisdictions.
A federal court in Connecticut has ruled that the sale to a scrap yard of transformers that may contain hazardous substances does not create a rebuttable presumption that the transformers contained polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
The insureds brought this action seeking a declaration that the insurer had to provide them with underinsured motorist benefits.
Connecticut, like many other states, decades ago enacted a "mini-FTC" Act, modeled after the federal law, 15 U.S.C. 45(a)(1), prohibiting unfair trade practices.
Arrowood Indemnity Co., as reinsurer, sued The Covenant Group, a reinsurance program administrator, alleging that Covenant agreed to hold harmless and indemnify Arrowood for Covenant’s “failure to collect all premium audits arising under insurance policies issued pursuant to certain” agreements.
The Connecticut Supreme Court recently reversed a lower court decision and held that the failure to charge a jury on an insurer’s special defense of late notice was harmful error.