Takeaway: Plaintiffs in data breach class actions usually assert common law tort claims, such as claims for negligence, gross negligence, and
An insured has an opportunity to settle a $150 million class action suit for $4.9 million and asks its liability insurance carrier to pay the
The standard Comprehensive General Liability policy covers all sums an insured "becomes legally obligated to pay." Most state Supreme Courts that
In Holton v. Physician Oncology Servs., LP, No. S13A0012, 2013 WL 1859294 (Ga. May 6, 2013), the Georgia Supreme Court held that Georgia law does not
In what may be the first appellate ruling in the United States on the issue, the Georgia Supreme Court has ruled that a commercial policyholder may recover from its property damage insurer loss for “diminution in value” in addition to the costs of repairing a damaged building.
As we reported in our September 28, 2011 Legal Alert, the Georgia Supreme Court held last year that only licensed Georgia attorneys could lawfully file a response to a garnishment summons filed against an entity (as opposed to an individual) in a Georgia state or superior court, thus adding expense and delays to a procedure most Georgia employers and other business entities had traditionally handled through nonlegal staff, such as human resources or payroll personnel.
On September 12, 2011, the Supreme Court of Georgia adopted what, until then, had been an advisory opinion from the State Bar of Georgia declaring that nonlawyers who file responses to garnishments in a Georgia court of record are engaged in the unlicensed practice of law.
In a 6-to-1 decision, Monday the Georgia Supreme Court held that faulty workmanship is an "occurrence" under a commercial general liability (CGL) insurance policy as long as the resulting property damage or bodily injury is neither expected nor intended.
On November 2, 2010, Georgia voters approved an amendment to the Georgia Constitution that, absent a successful challenge to the validity of its enactment, will dramatically change Georgia law on restrictive covenants.
A non-solicitation of customer clause is a common form of restrictive covenant used in employment, distributorship, franchise, and other types of commercial contracts.