Document(s) published by this organization: 95
Show: results per page
|New York Court of Appeals: Vandalism Coverage under “Named Peril” Property Policy Can Apply Even When Malicious Act Is Not Directed at Covered Property|
Judith Zuckerman Frantz; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
November 11, 2013, previously published on November 7, 2013In a case with broad implications for property owners near construction sites (Georgitsi Realty, LLC v. Penn-Star Insurance Company, No. 156, October 17, 2013), the New York Court of Appeals has opened the door to broad first-party property damage coverage for losses emanating from nearby...
|A Superstorm Sandy Retrospective: How the Actions of New York Regulators May Shape Responses to Future Natural Disasters|
Sandy M. McDermott, Carl J. Pernicone, Frederick J. Pomerantz, Stacey B. Rowland; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
November 5, 2013, previously published on November 1, 2013A year after Superstorm Sandy came ashore, the New York Department of Financial Services (Department) issued Circular Letter No 8 of 2013 to inform New York licensed property/casualty insurers of the regulatory standards they should expect to encounter the next time a federal or state disaster...
|Change in Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Results in Strict Payment Deadlines for Settling Defendants|
Loren S. Cohen; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
November 4, 2013, previously published on October 29, 2013On August 26, 2013, Illinois Governor Pat Quinn approved a legislative measure designed to hold settling defendants’ feet to the fire in making timely settlement payments in those cases alleging personal injury, property damage, wrongful death or tortious conduct involving a claim for money...
|“Savings Clause” Still Threatens ERISA Plan Limitations|
Laura E. Fannon, Adrienne C. Publicover; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
November 4, 2013, previously published on October 30, 2013In Kentucky Association of Health Plans v. Miller, 538 U.S. 329 (2003), the United States Supreme Court restructured the ERISA preemption analysis and reaffirmed the holding in Unum Life Ins. Co. v. Ward, 526 U.S. 358 (1999), that California’s notice-prejudice rule was saved from preemption....
|Maryland Court of Appeals Upholds the Frye-Reed “General Acceptance” Test for Admissibility of Expert Testimony|
Peter W. Chin, Angela W. Russell; Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP;
October 28, 2013, previously published on October 23, 2013The Maryland Court of Appeals issued an opinion on September 24, 2013, in Josephine Chesson, et al. v. Montgomery Mutual Insurance Co., No. 97, 2013 WL 5311126, -- A.3d --- (Md. Sept. 24, 2013) (Chesson III), finding that, under Maryland’s Frye-Reed standard, where there exists continued...