Insurance Law News

Insurance Law Alert

As a free service to clients, prospective clients and other interested persons, we publish the Insurance Law Alert, a newsletter that provides concise summaries of recent legislation and appellate decisions.

Recent Rulings and Legislation

June 2010

• In Light of "Severability" Clause, Exclusion for Intentional Act of "An" Insured Only Applies to Particular Insured Who Commits Such Act
• Automobile Policy "Step-Down" Provisions Limiting Coverage for Permissive Users Are Valid if They Are Conspicuous, Plain and Clear
• Court of Appeal Enforces Exclusion in Legal Malpractice Policy for Claims Made by Entities That Are Owned or Managed by the Insured

May 2010

• Liability Policy's Self-Insured Retention Can Only Be Satisfied By Named Insured, Not Additional Insured
• Party Liable Under "Peculiar Risk" Doctrine For Independent Contractor's Use Of Vehicle Is "Legally Responsible" For Independent Contractor's Conduct And Hence An "Insured" Under Independent Contractor's Auto Policy

April 2010

• Failure to Answer Questions at EUO and to Submit Complete Proof of Loss Defeats Insured’s Suit
• Defending Under One Policy Does Not Insulate Insurer from Liability for Alleged Breach of Duty to Defend / Settle Under Second Policy
• Even If Insured Business Was Operating at Net Loss Greater than Operating Costs at Time of Loss, Business Interruption Benefits for Continuing Normal Operating Expenses Are Not Reduced by Net Loss
• Subhaulers Are Not “Insureds” Under Trucker’s Commercial Auto Policy Providing “Hired Auto” Coverage

March 2010

• Appraiser’s Service as Expert in Unrelated Case is Not Basis for Disqualification from Appraisal Panel
• Fax Blasting is Not Covered Under CGL Policy’s “Advertising Injury” or “Property Damage” Coverages
• Insurer Seeking Equitable Contribution Can Only Recover Fees and Costs Exceeding Its “Fair Share”

February 2010

• “Products-Completed Operations Hazard” Exclusion Bars Coverage for Insured’s Operations, Regardless of Whether Operations are Related to Insured’s Products
• Insured’s Mistaken Construction of House Over Property Line Does Not Constitute “Occurrence,” or “Accident”
• “Personal and Advertising Injury” Coverage Does Not Apply to Alleged Damages Caused by Insured’s False Advertising of Its Own Products

January 2010

2009 Annual Review of California Insurance Law (PDF) - Download Free Adobe Reader program

Additional Rulings:

• Party Who Bought Fire-Damaged Property at Sheriff’s Sale Was Not Entitled to Insurance Proceeds, and Insurer Was Entitled to Refund from Lender to Extent Lender Received Payoff from Sheriff’s Sale
• “Land Subsidence” Exclusion Relieves Insurer of Duty to Defend Insured Against Suits Arising From Landslide

December 2009

2009 Annual Review of California Insurance Law (PDF) - Download Free Adobe Reader program

November 2009

• “First Publication” Exclusion Relieves Insurer of Duty to Defend Insured In Trademark Infringement Action

October 2009

• “Contractors Warranty Endorsement” Limits Insurer’s Duty to Indemnify General Contractor Who Fails to Obtain Indemnity Agreements and Certificates of Insurance from Subcontractors
• Insurer That Denies Defense to Insured May Not Later Intervene In Third-Party Suit

September 2009

• Policies Do Not Cover Damages and Statutory Attorney’s Fees Arising from Insureds’ False Imprisonment and Exploitation of Domestic Servant
• Agent/Broker Who Claims to Have Special Knowledge of Insured’s Business Assumes Special Duty to Obtain Proper Coverage

August 2009

• Insurer Has No Duty to Defend Insured in Assault and Battery Case, Even Though Insured May Negligently Have Believed He Was Acting in "Self-Defense"
• Insurer Must Inform First-Party Claimant of Contractual Limitation Period, Even Where Claimant is Represented by Attorney

July 2009

• Toxic Tort Claims Against Insured Barred by “Seepage / Pollution / Contamination” Exclusion, and Insured Fails to Satisfy Conditions of “Buy Back” Coverage
• Insurer Has No Duty to Cover Costs Awarded In Connection with Claims that Are Not Potentially Covered
• Restitution Order in Criminal Case Does Not Prevent Victim (or Insurer) From Obtaining Separate Civil Judgment

Visit News Archives >

Top of Page