Search Results (7213)
Documents on insurance
Show: results per page
|Florida Supreme Court Rules that in a UM Case the Insurer is Bound by the Damages Found in the UM Case and that Trial Court may Reserve Jurisdiction in Judgment to Allow Plaintiff to Amend to Add Bad Faith Claim|
March 30, 2016, previously published on February 26, 2016On February 25, 2016, in the case of Fridman v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Illinois, Case No. SC13-1607, the Florida Supreme Court issued a very significant ruling concerning the timing and procedure for bad faith claims inninsured/underinsured motorist (UM) cases. At issue in the case was whether the...
|Michigan: Federal Law May Pre-empt Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act After All|
Chad Arfons, David M. Kall, Susan Millradt McGlone; McDonald Hopkins LLC;
March 24, 2016, previously published on March 17, 2016In June of 2011, Governor Snyder signed the Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act (Act), which imposed a one percent assessment on health-related services performed in Michigan and paid by employer sponsored health plans and other third-party carriers. The law went into effect on January 1, 2012....
|Ohio Supreme Court Signals Narrow Application of Ohio’s Inferred Intent Doctrine|
David J. Oberly; Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.;
March 23, 2016, previously published on March 1, 2016In Granger v. Auto-Owners Insurance, 40 N.E.3d 1110 (Ohio 2015), the Ohio Supreme Court was afforded its first opportunity since Allstate Insurance Company v. Campbell, 942 N.E.2d 1090 (Ohio 2010) to clarify the reach of Ohio’s inferred intent doctrine, which automatically triggers an...
|Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Rejects "Selective Tender Rule" As Exception to Doctrine of Equitable Contribution Among Co-Insurers|
Nicholas C. Cramb, Lavinia Weizel; Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.;
March 21, 2016, previously published on March 8, 2016On Monday, March 7, 2016, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (“SJC”) rejected the “selective tender rule” as contrary to Massachusetts insurance law and sound public policy in Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania v. Great Northern Insurance Company. In...
|Comments on Texas Windstorm Insurance Association Inspection Rule Due March 21, 2016|
Colodny Fass P.A.;
March 17, 2016, previously published on March 10, 2016The Texas Department of Insurance posted an informal working draft and seeks stakeholder comment on amendments that would update 28 TAC §5.4605, relating to Items Not Requiring an Inspection for the Purposes of Windstorm and Hail Insurance Coverage through the Texas Windstorm Insurance...
|When Does Bad Faith Three Year Statute Of Limitations In Delaware Begin?|
William R. Adams; Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote, P.C.;
March 17, 2016, previously published on March 8, 2016The question as to when the statute of limitations begins for a bad faith failure to settle a third-party lawsuit claim in Delaware remained unanswered until Friday, March 4, 2016.
|”Potentiality” is Key to Insurer’s Duty to Defend|
Talley H-S Kovacs; Pessin Katz Law, P.A.;
March 8, 2016, previously published on February 12, 2016Talley’s Tip: In Maryland, a liability insurer has a duty to defend an insured against any and all potentially covered claim(s) made against that insured in a lawsuit. In a frequently cited case called Brohawn v. Transamerica Insurance Company, 276 Md. 396, 407-408 (1975), Maryland’s...
|New System Aids LA Police Identify Drivers with Lapsed Policies|
Sutherland Asbill Brennan LLP;
March 8, 2016, previously published on March 7, 2016A new monitoring system is being launched in Louisiana to assist police with enforcement of a state requirement that drivers are up to date on paying their auto insurance premiums. The system will pull reports from insurers and provide the data to the state Office of Motor Vehicles (OMV) and to...
|The New Fire in the Warehouse|
Patricia McHugh Lambert, Gregory S. Weiner; Pessin Katz Law, P.A.;
March 8, 2016, previously published on February 10, 2016So much has been written about cyber liability that people can become numb to the topic. After all, how many times can we read about the 2013 data breach that impacted all of Target’s United States locations and how that event is still impacting the company’s operations, earnings, and...
|Pennsylvania Supreme Court Limits Attorneys’ Fees in Peer Review Cases|
Katharine Mooney; Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.;
March 7, 2016, previously published on March 1, 2016In Doctor’s Choice Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation Center, P.C. v. Travelers Personal Ins. Co., 2015 Pa. LEXIS 3010 (Pa. Dec. 21, 2015), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court addressed the availability of attorneys’ fees in the first-party personal injury context. The court reversed the...